The Central Information Commission on the date July 6th, 2021 decided on a case where the appellant was dissatisfied with the response given by the CPIO. Even the FAA’S order was not accepted by him. So, he approached the commission with a second appeal. The commission after hearing both sides found that the appellant’s demand was a kind of pressure on the CPIO. By pronouncing some previous judgement of the RTI Act, the commission disposed of this appeal.
The appellant filed an RTI application on the date 30.05.2019 looking for some information and measures taken on his depiction on the date 04.04.2019 concerning the enhancement in his pay. The appellant was dissatisfied with the response received by the CPIO and filed the first appeal. The FAA’S order of the date 25.07.2019 validated the CPIO’S reply. Again being aggrieved by this, he approached the commission with an instant second appeal. The appellant was not present during the course of the hearing but he communicated with the registry connected with this bench and told that his written submission must be given deliberation for determining the decision.
Arguments before the Court
As the appellant was not present so the court enchanted the gist of the written submissions sent by him on 30.06.2021 and 01.07.2021. It was noticed that the essence of the disagreement of the appellant was that he was discontented by the action taken against his representation by the bothered Secretary of the CPIO. Appellant’s point of argument was that DoPT was presumed to furnish the explanation rather than redirecting the asserted representation of 04.04.2019 to Director General, Dept. of Posts, New Delhi, and with this, the appellant claimed that the details provided to him were deceiving and fallacious. In addition, the CPIO clarified that the information supplied to the appellant was as per the obtainability of the records.
The commission after giving ample attention to the grounds of the second appeal as well as the written document submitted by the appellant observed that relief endeavoured for him via instant matter was not justifiable under the RTI Act. Moreover, the court observed that the appellant misconceived the directive of the RTI Act and was determined on suppressing the CPIO for not delivering the desired response and forwarding the same to the dept of posts. Appellant attention was drawn towards a few judgements where section 2(f) of the RTI Act was described.
The court decided to dispose of the matter by stating that it didn’t find any appropriate point for mediating, the submissions made by the CPIO were justified by the commission. Further, the appellant was instructed to seek his administrative unfairness before the relevant forum if he believed that the measures taken on his representation of 04.04.2019 were inaccurate.
Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgment from courts. Follow us on Google News, Instagram, LinkedIn, Facebook & Twitter. You can 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.