Central Information Commission Dismisses Appeal Due to Prior Absence of RTI Applicant-Appellant in Hearing

- Advertisement -

Facts

The Appellant filed an RTI application on 30th May 2018 seeking information from the CPIO. CPIO responded to the RTI application on 27th July 2018. The Appellant was not satisfied with the response of the CPIO. The Appellant felt that the response given by the CPIO lacked the complete information that he had sought. So, the Appellant filed for an FAA on 1st September 2019. The FAA order came out on 12th November 2018. The FAA order supported the response given by the CPIO to the Appellant.

The Appellant was dissatisfied with the FAA order. Hence, he filed for a Second Appeal under Section 19 of the RTI Act on grounds of unsatisfactory reply on 13th March 2019. He asked the Commission to ensure that the CPIO provides the complete information that was sought by him and to also take legal action against the respondent.

Arguments Advanced

The hearing was conducted through a video conference. The Appellant was not present during the hearing despite prior intimation. The appellant did submit a written document requesting the Commission to pause the proceedings of the current issue due to certain reasons. The respondent stated that they have settled the grievances of the Appellant.

Court Observations

- Advertisement -

The Appellant was not present during the hearing. He was allowed to file for a second appeal under Section 19 of the RTI Act. The Appellant did not have any specific or valid reason as to why he wanted to pause the court proceedings.

Decision

While going through the facts of the case, the Commission observed that the Respondents have succeeded in settling the disputes of the Appellant. The Commission understood all of the grievances and issues faced by the Appellant were solved by the Respondents. The written submission made by the Appellant with regards to pausing the court proceedings was dismissed as the Appellant failed to provide any kind of concrete reason to do the same. Since the Respondents settled all the disputes of the Appellant, there was no need for further investigation. Hence, the Second Appeal was disposed of.

Click here to read the judgement.


- Advertisement -

Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgments from the Court. Follow us on Google News, Instagram, LinkedIn, Facebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

- Advertisement -
- Advertisement -

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

About the Author

- Advertisement -
- Advertisement -spot_img