O R D E R

FACTS The Appellant vide RTI application sought information, as under:- The SDM (HQ) vide letter dated 24.02.2022 furnished a reply to the Appellant. Dissatisfied with the reply of the CPIO, the Appellant approached the FAA.The FAA vide order dated 25.07.2022, furnished a reply to the Appellant and disposed off the Appeal.

Thereafter, the Appellant filed a Second Appeal before the Commission.

HEARING:

Facts emerging during the hearing:

The following were present:

Appellant: Present through AC Respondent: Smt. Sunil SR-II Basai Darapur, Mr Bijay Shankar Jha SO, Present in Person The Appellant while reiterating the contents of the RTI Application submitted that he had sought information regarding supply all the circulars of Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi regarding fraud related to Stricker No. "89-1998-09139-095S1”. He said it was found that another Registry Paper for a small part of same property has been forged to create evidences in connivance with some officials of e-SR-I. He further stated that information sought regarding a sticker/ Bar Code which was put on the fraud document, on which the respondent replied that work related to the above said sticker was done by Net Spider company and when he forwarded their queries to Net Spider company, the company had no answer to that.

The Respondent (Smt. Sunil SR-II Basai Darapur) while defending their case inter alia submitted that a suitable information as per the RTI Act has already been furnished to the Appellant vide letter dated 24.02.2022 and subsequently dated 25.07.2022. She further informed that she had recently joined the division and needed more time to examine the matter. She deposed that the contract for scanning the documents had been awarded to Net Spider company and the same was informed to the Appellant .

DECISION:

Keeping in view the facts of the case and the submissions made by both the parties, the Commission observes that this is a case of great importance when it comes to transparency in administration and appears to challenge the very principles of good governance. Therefore, it directs the CPIO to re- examine the RTI Application with the seriousness it deserves and furnish point wise, suitable information to the Appellant, strictly in accordance with the spirit of transparency and accountability as enshrined in the RTI Act, 2005 within a period of 30 days from the receipt of this order under the intimation to the Commission. The respondent may redact the personal information of the third parties.

The Commission further takes serious note that despite clear guidelines and instructions of the Commission not to carry mobile phones during the hearing, the Appellant failed to comply with the aforesaid guidelines/ instructions. Hence it cautions the Appellant to be careful in future.

The Appeal stands disposed accordingly.

(Uday Mahurkar) (उदय माहूरकर )

(Information Commissioner) (सचू ना आयुक्त )

Authenticated true copy

(अद्विप्रमाद्वणत एवं सत्याद्वपत प्रद्वत

)

(R. K. Rao) (आर.के. राव )

(Dy. Registrar) (उप -पंजीयक )

011-26182598 द्वदनांक / Date: 10.03.2023