Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2010/001657/8716Adjunct and Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/001657. Case: Mr. Ranjit Singh Vs Mr. Pravesh Rnajan Jha Public Information Officer and SDM Government of NCT of Delhi. Central Information Commission

Case Number:Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2010/001657/8716Adjunct and Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/001657
Party Name:Mr. Ranjit Singh Vs Mr. Pravesh Rnajan Jha Public Information Officer and SDM Government of NCT of Delhi
Judges:Shailesh Gandhi, I.C.
Issue:Right to information Act
Judgement Date:September 03, 2010
Court:Central Information Commission
 
FREE EXCERPT

Decision:

Shailesh Gandhi, I.C.

Information Sought

1. The Appellant sought information regarding-

A request for name correction in Khasra Girdawari in respect of Khasra No. 120/85, Sarai Kale Khan was made on 10/07/2008. Please let us know the reason why the correction could not done

Reply of the Public Information Officer (PIO)

2. The request was made in the name of the appellant's father. The request for the correction is still under consideration. Since the record was in Urdu, it needs to be translated and verified before proceeding further.

Grounds for the First Appeal:

3. Unsatisfactory Information provided by the PIO.

Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):

4. In respect of appeal under ID No. 50 it appears that no specific information was furnished in respect of his application. PIG is strictly directed to provide him specific and upto date information with till date proceedings in his case. He is also directed to expedite the matter and get it done within a month's time.

Grounds for the Second Appeal:

5. Unsatisfactory Information provided by the PIO

Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing on 27 July 2010:

The following were present

Appellant: Mr. Ranjit Singh

Respondent: Mr. Javed Alam Khan, Tehsildar and deemed PIO;

6. The appellant had made a mistake in filing the name in the application before the Public Authority. He had filed an application with the SDM to correct the mistake in the name on 10/07/2008. For reasons best known to the public authority,- which can be guessed by anyone,- no action was taken on this application. The appellant in the hope of putting some pressure filed the RTI application on 31/12/2009 asking the status of his application. No effort was made to provide the information about the status or the progress of application but the PIO with complete brazenness effectively told the appellant that the correction of the name has not been done without informing him what was the progress in the matter. It is apparent that the FAA Mr. Vivek Pandey Dy. Commissioner (South) was able to see that the PIO's action was unjustified. Hence he has noted, "In respect of appeal under ID No. 50 it appears that no specific information was furnished in respect of his application. PIG is strictly directed to provide him specific and upto date information with till date proceedings in his case. He is also directed to expedite the matter and get it done within a month's time." The earlier Deemed PIO...

To continue reading

REQUEST YOUR TRIAL