Central Information Commission Judgements

Shri Pratap Singh Tomar vs Davp, M/O Information & … on 11 December, 2008

Central Information Commission
Shri Pratap Singh Tomar vs Davp, M/O Information & … on 11 December, 2008
                 Central Information Commission
                                     *****

No.CIC/OK/C/2008/00505/AD

Dated: 11 December 2008

Name of the Complainant : Shri Pratap Singh Tomar ,
Kalam Ki Kranti,
H.No.-7-C-19,
Mahavir Nagar 3rd
Kota, Rajasthan.

Name of the Public Authority : DAVP, M/o Information & Broadcasting

Background:

1. The RTI-request was filed on 14 November 2007. The Complainant

requested for information on why ‘Kalam Ki Kranti’ newspaper was not

empanelled even after submission of all necessary documents.

2. Not getting any information from the PIO within the stipulated period,

the Applicant filed an appeal with the first Appellate Authority on 17 December

2007 wanting to know what action the Department had taken on a letter

written by an MP to the Minister of I&B regarding this. The CPIO replied on 24

December 2007. Still not satisfied with the response, the Applicant preferred

his Second Appeal before the Central Information Commission on 15 February

2008 which was registered as a complaint in the Commission on 22 May 2008.

3. The Bench of Smt. Annapurna Dixit, Information Commissioner,
scheduled the hearing for 11 December 2008.

4. Ms. Mattu J.P. Singh, Director & CPIO and Shri Gopal Jirai, AME,
represented the Respondents.

5. The Complainant, Shri Pratap Singh Tomar, was not present in the
hearing.

Decision:

6. The Respondents stated they had replied to both the RTI-application and

the First Appeal on 24 December 2007. The Respondents also stated that they

had also written to the Hon’ble Member of Parliament regarding his case.

7. The Commission noted that the refusal for empanelment of newspapers

for the year 2007 as requested by the Complainant was based on the rules and

regulations for empanelment and that these are available on the Ministry’s

website which are on the website and clearly give instructions about the

formalities that are required to be fulfilled for empanelment of newspapers.

Since the Complainant did no fulfill these formalities, his request was rejected.

8. The Commission holds that as there is no information to be provided, the

appeal is rejected.

(Annapurna Dixit)
Information Commissioner

Authenticated true copy:

(K.G. Nair)
Designated Officer

CC:

1. Shri Pratap Singh Tomar ,
Kalam Ki Kranti,
H.No.-7-C-19,
Mahavir Nagar 3rd ,
Kota, Rajasthan

2. The Public Information Officer,
Directorate of Audio & Visual Publicity,
M/o Information and Broadcasting,
Soochana Bhawan,
New Delhi

3. Officer Incharge, NIC

4. Press E Group, CIC