Chief Information Commission Dismisses Appellant’s Application Seeking Redressal for Grievances Faced by Him
Amita Pandove, Information Commissioner will decide the Second Appeal filed by the Appellant.
Home » Archives for Alan V Avanesh » Page 3
Amita Pandove, Information Commissioner will decide the Second Appeal filed by the Appellant.
Facts The Appellant filed an RTI Application on 8th January 2018 asking the CPIO to provide a copy of the N.C.A.E.R about a Research Institution registered under Special Registration Act submitted in 1986, provide a true copy of N.C.A.E.R about payment of Customs duties on import, provide a true copy
Facts The Appellant had filed an RTI application to the CPIO, National Consumer Dispute Resolution Commission in New Delhi. The Appellant sought information about whether the authority letter for authorization to someone is valid, the rule under which the district consumer forum may be bound by the decisions of the
Facts The Appellant filed an RTI Application on 30th October 2018. In the application, the Appellant sought information about the valuation certificate which was issued on 11th September 2017. The PIO or Assistant Commissioner transferred the application to the APIO/TPB on 1st November 2018. The APIO/TPB didn’t respond to the
Saroj Punhani, Information Commissioner will decide whether the response provided by the CPIO is within the provisions of the RTI Act.
Facts This appeal had originated from the order given by ITSC (Income-tax Settlement Commission) on 11th June 2020. The main issue in the appeal is the denial of the grant of credit for tax deducted at source. The assessee is a subsidiary of the National American Coal Cooperation (NACC). NACC
Case: Samir Sardana vs Army HQ Facts The Appellant filed an RTI application on 25th January 2019. In the application, the Appellant sought information on a copy of the FIR of an Army officer that tied a sentient on a jeep, name of the Investigating officer, date of commencement of
Introduction Saroj Punhani, Information Commissioner will decide the second appeal filed by the Appellant. Facts The Appellant filed an RTI Application on 17th May 2019. In the application, the Appellant asked for attested copies of her evaluated answer booklets for Roll no. 2640469. The CPIO replied to the application on
Excerpt The Chief Information Commissioner Y.K Sinha stated that since both parties are the same in both cases, the cases have been combined together for hearing and decision. Facts The case relates to two RTI application cases filed by the appellant, seeking information from the PMO. In the first case
Subscribe to our newsletter and receive a curated selection of legal updates directly to your inbox.