CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
.....
F.No.CIC/AT/A/2008/00197
Dated, the 08th July, 2008.
Appellant : Shri D.P. Gupta
Respondents : Delhi Financial Corporation
This matter came up for hearing on 02.07.2008 pursuant to Commission’s
hearing notice dated 06.05.2008. Appellant was present in person, while the
respondents were represented by Shri A.M.Goyal, General Manager, Smt.Kiran
Mahajan, Sr. Manager (Legal) and Shri U.K. Diwan, Sr. Manager
2. The appellant’s RTI-request dated 20.08.2007 read as follows:-
“In the case of M/s.Super Conductors Pvt. Limited, Interest was frozen
from the date of first sale of machinery as per the prevailing policy at that
time and date of first sale of machinery is 6th Nov, 89 in the this case.
Kindly supply me the information along with the order at freezing the
interest from 6th Nov 1989 as per the prevailing policy at that time.”
3. CPIO’s reply dated 10.09.2007 provided information to the appellant,
which was upheld by the order of the AA, dated 23.10.2007.
4. During the hearing, the appellant stated that the information disclosed to
him was false and the copy of the Board proceeding dated 27.12.1993 given to
him was tampered with. Copy of this proceeding was provided by the appellant
to the Commission as Annexure to his second-appeal. According to the appellant,
the top portion of the proceeding shows clear evidence of tampering. It appears to
bare eye that the original board-proceedings were partly pasted over.
5. The respondents’ response was that the appellant was welcome to inspect
the original and satisfy himself if there was anything that was wrong.
They reiterated that the information supplied to the appellant was accurate and
factually correct.
6. The appellant’s repeated reference to tampering with the records is surely
not borne out by evidence before the Commission. Appellant will have to seek
other alternative avenue in order to prove the point of tampering of records.
Page 1 of 2
7. However, considering that respondents are agreeable to let appellant inspect
all relevant records to satisfy himself about their genuineness, it is directed that
CPIO may intimate within 2 weeks of this order a date and time when the
appellant can inspect the files / records / documents appropriate to his
RTI-queries. He shall be allowed to take copies and certified copies of the
documents as he may choose, on payment of fee and further-fee as determined by
the CPIO.
8. Appeal is disposed of accordingly.
9. Copy of this decision be sent to the parties.
Sd/-
(A.N. TIWARI)
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER
Authenticated by –
Sd/-
( D.C. SINGH )
Under Secretary & Asst. Registrar
Page 2 of 2