Central Information Commission Judgements

Ms.Indu Sharma vs Department Of Legal Affairs on 28 October, 2010

Central Information Commission
Ms.Indu Sharma vs Department Of Legal Affairs on 28 October, 2010
                   CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                                          .....

F.No.CIC/AT/A/2010/000610
Dated, the 28  October, 2010.

                                                                   th


 Appellant         : Ms.Indu Sharma 


 Respondent        : Department of Legal Affairs
 s

This   matter   came   up   for   hearing   partly   through   videoconference 
(VC) on 25.10.2010 pursuant to Commission’s notice dated 06.10.2010. 
Appellant, who was notified to be present at NIC VC facility at Amroha, 
J.P.   Nagar,   was   absent   when   the   hearing   commenced,   while   the 
respondents ― represented by Shri Nirmal Singh, CPIO and Shri Jagdish 
Kumar,  Section Officer  ―  were present at Commission’s  office at New 
Delhi.

2. Appellant’s RTI­application dated 05.03.2010 was on the subject of 
the   decision   of   the   government   on   her   application   for   appointment   as 
Notary Public.

3. All the details requested through her RTI­application were furnished 
by the CPIO to her on 25.03.2010, in which she was informed that her 
request for appointment as Notary Public was under consideration of the 
government.   Subsequently,   she   was   informed   that   her   application   for 
appointment   as   Notary   Public   has   been   rejected.     This   matter   finds 
mention in a submission made to the Appellate Authority by Smt.Poonam 
Suri,  ALA   & In­charge   of  Notary  Cell   and  also  in  Appellate  Authority’s 
order dated 25.05.2010.  The net upshot of all these proceedings is that 
the appellant’s request for appointment as Notary Public has been turned 
down   and   the   position   has   been   intimated   to   her   both   through   the 
endorsement of the Appellate Authority.

CIC_AT_A_2010_000610_M_44929.doc 
Page 1 of 2

4. I have read the second­appeal petition of the appellant.   She has 
reiterated   the   points   about   not   having   been   provided   the   requested 
information. This doesn’t seem to be correct because all information has 
been disclosed to her from time to time.

5. Appeal has no legs to stand. Closed.

6. Copy of this direction be sent to the parties. 

 ( A.N. TIWARI )
CHIEF INFORMATION COMMISSIONER

CIC_AT_A_2010_000610_M_44929.doc 
Page 2 of 2