Reply by First Appellate Authority CIC New Delhi against Non-Implementation of Section 7(1) of RTI Act 2005 dated 30 January 2017

1. 2/16/2017 RTI Online :: Online RTI Information System
https://rtionline.gov.in/request/listActionStatus.php?action=3HxZPWXzIfxl866Ei7Pkn480FK1tiCmdW3LHObS1YRg%3D&&code=1cFjVr1EDFcUMuvtm9c… 1/1
Final Status of CICOM/A/2017/60014
Applicant Name OM PRAKASH
Date of receipt 27/01/2017
Request Filed With Central Informa뼔�on Commission
Text of Applica뼔�on
DETAIL FIRST APPEAL HAS BEEN ATTACHED WITH 7 PAGES AND THE
SAME HAS BEEN EMAILED TO rk dot mathur53 at gov dot in on 24 01
2017
I regret that CPIO RTI Cell CIC New Delhi has supplied the informa뼔�on
incomplete misleading false and unsa뼔�sfactorily so that either you can
give it or else you can order him to supply the same sa뼔�sfactorily or
supply the same as per the rules under RTI Act 2005 My point wise
averments and arguments are as under
The cita뼔�on of Act and subsequent reply by DS CR depicts ABSOLUTE
MISMATCH and the same depicts viola뼔�on of RULE OF LAW
The cita뼔�on of PERUSAL OF RECORDS absolutely violates sec뼔�on 11 ii
procedure for deciding appeals of RTI Rules 2012
Arguments with cita뼔�on under reply no 1 and 2 to be read as the
argument under reply no 03 which clearly indicates that the reply by
the DS CR of Central Informa뼔�on Commission is NOT IN ORDER AT ALL
Hence the Apex ins뼔�tu뼔�on is shielding protec뼔�ng the BAD ELEMENTS
of State Apparatus and offending harassing vic뼔�mizing the common
man and senior ci뼔�zen oxygen dependent woman
The informa뼔�on supplied is absolutely false and protec뼔�ng the bad
elements of state apparatus Hence true informa뼔�on to be supplied in
accordance with RTI Act 2005 and RTI Rules 2012 with appropriate
puni뼔�ve ac뼔�on
Request document (if any)
Status APPEAL DISPOSED OF as on 30/01/2017
Date of Ac뼔�on 30/01/2017
Remarks
Reply :‐ On perusal of the RTI applica뼔�on, reply of the CPIO and
the first appeal, it is observed that appellant has sought
informa뼔�on on Point 1 "Can CIC afford to say...... dated
28.12.2016" and Point 2 "Is reply of the DS CR........to each other."
As per RTI Act only such informa뼔�on can be supplied under the
Act which are already exist and is held by the public authority or
held under the control of public authority. The PIO is not
supposed to create informa뼔�on or to interpret informa뼔�on. The
informa뼔�on sought in Points 1 & 2 above fall under the category
of interpret/comments, therefore, no interven뼔�on is required by
the FAA.
As regards Point 3 is concerned "What ac뼔�on has been taken
against DS CR, CIC for non implementa뼔�on of provision of sec뼔�on
7......"
It is observed that Administra뼔�on has already examined this issue
and found the reply given by DS CR in order, therefore, no ac뼔�on
has been recommended against him. The same has already been
communicated to the appellant. Therefore, no interven뼔�on is
required on the part of the FAA.