CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
.....
F.No.CIC/AT/A/2008/00486
Dated, the 20th October, 2008.
Appellant : Shri Anil Sood
Respondents : Ministry of Law & Justice
This matter came up for hearing on 13.10.2008. Appellant was present in
person, while the respondents were represented by Shri M.K. Sharma, CPIO,
Shri R.K.Srivastava, CAPIO and Shri A.K. Srivastava, Section Officer.
2. During the hearing, it emerged that appellant has been allowed to inspect
the files relative to his RTI-queries dated 29.11.2007. He has inspected the note
files which would have revealed to him how the file would have been processed
in the office of the public authority. The disclosure requirement has thus been
fully satisfied.
3. Appellant now wants to receive from the respondents assurances about
future and even time-bound disposal of his complaints against a third-party, who
happens to be a public notary. RTI laws do not entitle him to receive any such
information. He cannot also hope to receive respondents’ confirmation about
whether or what action would be taken against those who allegedly failed to act
on appellant’s complaints against the third-party. AA has also rightly held that as
there was no delay in the CPIO furnishing the replies to the appellant , there need
not be any refund of fee to the appellant.
4. Appeal, therefore, fails. Closed.
5. Copy of this decision be sent to the parties.
( A.N. TIWARI )
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER
Page 1 of 1