Your World of Legal Intelligence
 India | 1-800-335-6202

CIC/VS/A/2014/001695/SB. Case: Ananda Singh Vs Central Public Information Officer, Intelligence Bureau. Central Information Commission

Document Cited in Precedent Map Related
Vincent
Case NumberCIC/VS/A/2014/001695/SB
Party NameAnanda Singh Vs Central Public Information Officer, Intelligence Bureau
JudgesSudhir Bhargava, Information Commissioner
IssueRight To Information Act, 2005 - Section 24(1)
Judgement DateNovember 30, 2015
CourtCentral Information Commission

Court Information Central Information Commission Cases
Judgment Date 30-Nov-2015
Party Details Ananda Singh Vs Central Public Information Officer, Intelligence Bureau
Case No CIC/VS/A/2014/001695/SB
Judges Sudhir Bhargava, Information Commissioner
Acts Right To Information Act, 2005 - Section 24(1)

Decision:

Sudhir Bhargava, Information Commissioner

1. Shri. Ananda Singh filed an application dated 14.03.2014 under the Right to Information Act, 2005 before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Intelligence Bureau (IB), seeking information on seven points including, the date from which post of ATO was re-designated as DCIO (Tech) and what are the higher posts above to the post of ATO/DCIO (Tech), what are the criteria for promotion from the post of ATO/DCIO(Tech) and other higher posts, what was the sanctioned strength of the ATO/DCIO (Tech) and higher posts above ATO/DCIO (Tech) under Intelligence Bureau or any other offices under its control during the period 01.01.1999 to 14.03.2014 with date thereof, etc.

2. The CPIO vide reply dated 31.03.2014 informed the appellant that the Intelligence Bureau is exempted from the purview of the RTI Act. Not satisfied with the reply of the CPIO, the appellant filed an appeal dated 08.04.2014 before the FAA. The FAA vide order dated 03.05.2014 upheld the reply of the CPIO, As he was not satisfied with the response of the FAA, the appellant filed second appeal dated 28.05.2014 before the Commission on the ground that FAA and CPIO failed to appreciate that non supplying of information is detrimental to the appellant who has served Intelligence Bureau honestly and devotedly with unblemished record for more than 37 years and requested the Commission to direct the CPIO and FAA to provide him the information sought by him.

Hearing:

3. The appellant Shri Ananda Singh and the respondent Shri C. Srinagesh, Section Officer, Intelligence Bureau were present in person.

4. The appellant submitted that no information has been provided to him in response to his RTI application dated 14.03.2014.

5. The respondent submitted that IB has been declared an exempt organization under Section 24(1) read with Second Schedule of the RTI Act, 2005. Further, information sought by the appellant does not pertain to allegations of corruption and human rights violations. Hence, information has not been provided to the appellant.

Decision:

6. The Commission is aware that under...

To continue reading

Request your trial