1. C.Raja Rao filed an appeal to the State Information Commission for not receiving information he requested from the Project Director of DWMA Kurnool under the Right to Information Act. 2. Rao had filed RTI applications to the PIO and an appeal to the Appellate Authority of DWMA Kurnool but did not receive the information requested. 3. At the hearing, the PIO said some information was provided to Rao and the application was transferred to other departments for remaining information. 4. The Commission dismissed the case as Rao, an employee of DWMA, should not seek information from his own department according to a recent Supreme Court order.

1. A.P. State Information Commission
(Under Right to Information Act, 2005)
Opp. Public Gardens, Hyderabad - 500004
Phone Nos: (Office) 040-23230245/246, Fax: 23230592
Appeal No. 19195/SIC- PVB/2012 - Date : 23-05-2013
Appellant/Complainant : Sri C.Raja Rao
Additional programme officer
O/o Project Director,
DWMA, Collectorate Complex,
Kurnool. Kurnool Dist
Respondents : The Public Information Officer (RTI Act,)
O/o Project Director,
DWMA, Collectorate Complex,
Kurnool. Kurnool Dist
The Appellate Authority
The Project Director,
DWMA, Collectorate Complex,
Kurnool. Kurnool Dist.
O R D E R
Sri C.Raja Rao, Additional programme officer, O/o Project Director, DWMA, Collectorate
Complex, Kurnool. Kurnool Dist has filed 2nd appeal dated 05.12.2012 which was received by this
Commission on 15.12.2012 for not getting required information sought by him from the PIO & AA /
O/o Project Director, DWMA, Collectorate Complex, Kurnool. Kurnool Dist
The brief facts of the case as per the appeal and other records received along with it are that the
appellant filed an application dated 14.09.2012 before the PIO requesting to furnish the information on
points mentioned in his RTI Act 6 (1) application.
Since the appellant did not received required information from the Public Information Officer, he
filed 1st Appeal dated 15.10.2012 before the 1st Appellate Authority requesting to furnish the
information under Sec. 19(1) of the RTI Act-2005.
The appellant stated that as he did not received required information from the PIO & 1st
Appellate Authority, then he filed the 2nd
Appeal before this Commission requesting to take action
against the PIO and 1st Appellate Authority for not furnishing required information sought by him and
also to arrange to furnish the information.
The 2nd appeal was taken on file and Notices issued to both the parties for hearing on
23.05.2013.
The case is called on 23-05-2013. The Appellant is absent. The PIO is present.
The PIO submitted to the Commission that he furnished the information to the Appellant relating
to his department and transferred the application to the department concerned to furnish the remaining
information to the Appellant.
The Commission has gone through the papers and has observed that the applicant is the
employee of DWMA.
The Commission dismisses the case as the employee should not seek the information with the
same department as per the Supreme Court of India recent Order.
P. Vijaya Babu,
State Information Commissioner
Authenticated by:
(Varaprasad NVLN)
Asst. Registrar
Copy to: - The SO / SF