LAWS(CI)-2014-11-1

SANDEEP KUMAR GUPTA Vs. CENTRAL PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER

Decided On November 07, 2014
SANDEEP KUMAR GUPTA Appellant
V/S
CENTRAL PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FILE No. CIC/SH/A/2013/000001 1. This file contains an appeal in respect of an RTI application dated 9.7.2013 filed by the Appellant, seeking information regarding action taken on his representation made in August 2012 to the Chairman ASRB regarding "illegal selections and other irregularities at ASRB". He filed an appeal dated 6.11.2013 to the CIC, which was received by the Commission on 12.11.2013. In this appeal, he stated that he had not received any reply from the Respondents. File No. CIC/SH/C/2014/000003

(2.) THIS file contains a complaint in respect of an RTI application dated 29.9.2013 filed by the Complainant, seeking information regarding action taken by the Respondents on a complaint dated 14.9.2013 made by him to PMO and forwarded by PMO to Respondents. The CPIO responded on 22.11.2013 and requested the Complainant to specify the information that he wished to seek under the RTI Act, so that the same could be provided from the relevant records of the Respondents. The Complainant made compliant dated 5.12.2013 to the CIC, which was received by the Commission on 17.12.2013.

(3.) WE heard the submissions of the Appellant/Complainant and the Respondents. The Appellant/Complainant stated that he has not been provided the information sought by him. He alleged that the Respondents have been deliberately delaying replies to his RTI applications. The Respondents, on the other hand, submitted that the Appellant/Complainant was an unsuccessful candidate in a selection process conducted by them and has filed around 70 RTI applications. He was also allowed inspection of the relevant records, which he conducted in May 2012. The Appellant/Complainant, while not denying that he had filed around 70 RTI applications, stated that he has made different queries in the various RTI applications filed by him. He also stated that he had inspected the relevant records and then made a representation to the Chairman, ASRB regarding irregularities in the selection process. File No. CIC/SH/A/2013/000001