CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
.....
F.No.CIC/AT/A/2008/00677
Dated, the 27th February, 2009.
Appellant : Shri S.P. Goyal
Respondents : Customs Department (I&G)
This second-appeal was heard through videoconferencing on 19.01.2009.
Appellant was present at NIC Studio at Mumbai, whereas the respondents were
present at NIC facility at CIC Office at New Delhi, from where the Commission
conducted the hearing.
2. The RTI-application of the appellant dated 21.09.2007 is an exact replica
of his RTI-application, which came up to the Commission in Appeal
No.CIC/AT/A/2008/00150, which was decided, through CIC order dated
10.10.2008. This, as well as the previous RTI-application, were addressed to the
same officer, viz. the Chief Commissioner of Customs (Delhi Zone).
3. It is seen from the order of the Appellate Authority dated 12.02.2008 that
appellant’s first-appeal was rejected on grounds of it being time-barred.
Appellate Authority noted that the reply of the CPIO dated 21.11.2007 was
received by the appellant on 27.11.2007, whereas the appeal was received in the
Appellate Authority’s office only on 18.01.2008, i.e. with a delay of more than
three weeks. Appellate Authority was not satisfied with the reasons advanced by
the appellant for the condonation of the delay, which was that appellant was busy
with other urgent matters.
4. In his appeal-petition dated 14.01.2008, appellant has not stated anything
as to why the delayed filing of the first-appeal by him should be condoned.
5. I have noted that Shri S.P. Goyal is a serial petitioner. In several cases, he
has filed the same petition more than once ⎯ sometimes before the same CPIO,
sometimes before different CPIOs. He is not a genuine information-seeker.
6. In view of this, I do not see any reason why the delay in filing the
first-appeal should at-all be condoned. I also find that the reasons given by the
Appellate Authority to reject the request for condonation of delay was valid.
I, therefore, uphold the order of the Appellate Authority.
AT-27022009-11.doc
Page 1 of 2
7. Appeal is rejected.
8. Copy of this decision be sent to the parties.
( A.N. TIWARI )
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER
AT-27022009-11.doc
Page 2 of 2