J.K. MITTAL Vs. CPIO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FACTS

(2.) THE Commission posed a query to Ms. Himani Bhayana, Under Secretary, as to whether the respondents have provided the required information to the Complainant or not. On this very aspect, it is submitted by Ms. Himani Bhayana, that Complainant's RTI application dated 26 -12 -2013 does not pertain to her department but pertains to another Public Authority. However, Ms. Himani failed to point out the exact name and designation of concerned the Public Authority.

(3.) IT is pertinent to mention here that most important criterion among the other criteria mentioned under Section 18(1)(a) to (e) of the RTI Act, 2005, appears to be that complainant must be given incomplete, misleading and false information. However, the other criteria seems to be, refusal of access, not given response, charging unreasonable fee and even refusal of accepting the application for information, etc. etc.