CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION Appeal No. CIC/WB/A/2009/000141/SS dated 3.11.2008 Right to Information Act 2005 - Section 19 Name of the Appellant : Sh. Ombir Singh Malik, New Delhi Name of the Public Authority : P.S. Parliament Street Background
Vide an RTI application dated 13.06.2008, Sh. Ombir Singh Malik (hereinafter
called the appellant) sought information on 15 points regarding FIR No. 3/08, dated
5.01.2008, P.S. Tilak Marg, New Delhi. Vide letter dated 10.07.2008, Sh. Anand Mohan,
Dy. Commissioner of Police, New Delhi District, provided certain information to the
appellant. Dissatisfied with the reply of the CPIO, later on filed first appeal before the
First Appellate Authority (FAA). Sh. Ajay Kashyap, FAA/Jt. Commissioner of Police, New
Delhi Range. Vide letter dated 28.08.2008 directed the PIO to provide point-wise
information to the appellant. In compliance to order of the FAA, the PIO provided point-
wise reply to the appellant vide letter No. 1196/DIC/NDD dated 5.09.2008. However,
dissatisfied with the reply, the appellant has file a second appeal before the Commission.
2. The matter was heard on 17.12.2009.
3. Sh. Ombir Singh Malik, the appellant was present for the hearing.
4. Sh. U. S. Joon, ACP/HQ/NDD-cum-APIO and Sh. Bharat Bhushan, Head
Constable represented the respondent.
During the hearing the appellant submits that he was not provided any information
before the filling the appeal before the Commission. On the other hand Sh. U. S. Joon,
ACP/PHQ-PIO, submits that the point-wise information was provided to the appellant by
After examining the RTI application of the appellant, the Commission finds that
point-wise reply has been provided to the appellant, except on point No. 4. Regarding
point No. 4 of the RTI of the appellant, Sh. U. S Joon submits that no compliant of Sh.
Ombir Singh Malik, was ever received in his office, hence, no action could be taken. On
the other hand, the appellant hands over the copy of complaint to Sh. U. S. Joon, ACP, in
the presence of the Commission, wherein the complaint has been duly received in the
office of the respondents.
Prima-facie the Commission finds that the complaint was duly received in the
office of respondents. Hence, the respondents are directed to fix responsibility on the
earring officials who caused loss the copy of complaint of the appellant. The CPIO is
therefore directed to take appropriate action on the complaint of the appellant and
accordingly inform him. The order of the Commission may be compiled within 15 days of
receipt of this decision.
The respondents are further directed to provide the proof of sending the
information by UPC, to the appellant.
The matter is disposed off accordingly.
Authenticated true copy:
S.O. & Asst. Registrar
1. Sh. Ombir Singh Malik
Flat No. 639, Krishi Kunj
2. Sh. Anand Mohan (IPS)
Dy. Commissioner of Police
New Delhi Range
P.S. Parliament Street
3. Sh. Ajay Kashyap
Jt. Commissioner of Police
New Delhi Range