The Commission upheld the respondent's compliance with the RTI Act, finding no grounds for further disclosure as the summary trial findings had been set aside.

Headnote:(A) Navy Act, 1957 - Sections 60(A), 47

(C), and 74 - Right to Information Act, 2005 - Appellant sought information regarding summary trial proceedings and punishment warrant - Initial denial of information led to appeals - Respondent provided documents, but appellant claimed incomplete information - Commission found no infirmity in the provided responses and noted that the summary trial findings had been set aside, rendering the request for the chargesheet unsustainable. (Paras 1-7)

(B) Right to Information - The provisions of the RTI Act mandate timely and complete disclosure of information, but the Commission found that the respondent had complied with these requirements. (Paras 6-7)

Facts of the case:
The appellant was summarily tried on charges under the Navy Act and sought certified copies of trial proceedings and punishment warrant, which were initially denied. After appeals, some documents were provided, but the appellant claimed they were incomplete. (Paras 1-6)

Findings of Court:
The Commission found that the respondent had adequately addressed the appellant's queries and provided the necessary documents as per the RTI Act. The summary trial findings had been set aside, making the request for the chargesheet unsustainable. (Paras 6-7)

Issues: The main issues were whether the appellant received all requested documents and the validity of the summary trial proceedings after being set aside. (Paras 6-7)

Ratio Decidendi: The Commission ruled that the respondent had fulfilled the obligations under the RTI Act, and since the summary trial findings were set aside, the request for the chargesheet was no longer valid. (Paras 6-7)

Result: Appeal disposed of accordingly.

Information sought:

The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 09.05.2023 (online) seeking the following information:

“1. Brief: I was summarily tried at INS Netaji Subhas between 17 Feb 23 to 20 Feb 23 on three charges imposed under sections 60(A), 47(C) and 74 of the Navy Act 1957 by Commanding Officer. Punishment was awarded to me vide INS Netaji Subhas punishment warrant no. 02/2023 dated 20 Feb 2023. Punishments are as follows: -

(1) No.4-Reduction in rank to EA (R) IV.

(ii) No.9-Deprivation of second and first Good Conduct Badges (GCBs).

(iii) No.10-Reprimand by Captain.

(iv) No.12-Stoppage of leave for period of 60 days.

(a) However, certified copy of entire summary trial proceedings and copy of punishment warrant was not provided to me till date. Request to provide the same was denied vide INS Netaji Subhas letter no. 208/Disc/502274-H dated 03 Mar2023.

2. Request to provide the certified copy of entire summary trial proceedings in respect of me conducted at INS Netaji Subhas as indicated in para 1 including copy of punishment warrant.”

The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 07.07.2023 stating as under:

“Certified copies of summary trial proceeding and copy of punishment warrant forwarded by INS Dega are enclosed herewith.”

Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 31.07.2023. The FAA vide its order dated 15.09.2023, held as under:

“Refer to your appeal dated 31 Jul 23.

Your appeal has been examined in accordance with the extant provisions of the RTI Act, 2005.

In response of your appeal, the relevant documents provided by INS Dega are placed at Enclosure.”

Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.

A written submission dated 19.02.2025 has been filed by the Appellant which is taken on record. Contents of the same are reproduced below for ready reference:

“…1. Details of references:-

(a) Online RTI application no. DMAND/R/E/23/00739 dated 09 May 23.

(b) Transfer of RTI application vide IHQ MOD(N)/ CPIO (Navy) letter no. DL/0812/12011 dated 23 May 23.

(d) First appeal application no. RTI/DMAND/R/E/23/00739 dated 09 May 23 dated 31 Jul 23.

(e) First Appellate Authority (FAA) response letter no. AA (RTI)/AUG 23/01 dated 15 Sep 23.

(f) Personal application no. 11/2023/Personal dated 27 Sep 23.

(g) Application no. RTI/DMAND/R/E/23/00739 dated 09 May 23 dated 04 Oct 23.

(h) CIC appeal application no. RTI/DMAND/R/E/23/00739 dated 09 May 23 dated 30 Oct 23.

2. Details of Annexures attached and marked as A1 to A10: -

(A1) Print copy of patient department slip dated 28 Dec 22.

(A2) Copy of accused (applicant) statement ref. Nil dated 13 Jan 23.

(A3) INS Netaji Subhas letter 208/Disc/502274H dated 03 Mar 23.

(A4) HQENC/PIO response letter no. PIO/0128/NOV 23/32 dated 29 Dec 23.

(A5) Hon’ble Armed Forces Tribunal, Kolkata bench daily order dated 18 Jan 24.

(A6) NHQ/DPS letter DL/1477/251 dated 13 Feb 24.

(A7) Complaint/ Grievance application no. 04/2024/ROG dated 15 Jul 24.

(A8) INS Netaji Subhas letter 242/502274-l dated 13 Sep 24,

(A9) Complaint/Grievance forwarding application no 05/2024/ROG dated 20 Oct 24 (A10) INS Delhi Dismissal from service genform no. 2403039/S dated 09 Dec 24.

Reason for seeking Information

3 It is humbly submitted that I have been targeted on flimsy grounds with malafide intent by some officials at WOT (Kolkata). In light of personal vendetta and colonial mindset, I have faced harassment, insults, and deprivation of my statutory privileges.

(a) Baseless Allegations I was falsely accused of forgery concerning a medical slip, as detailed in Annexure A-1. This accusation appears to be part of a conspiracy involving the few authorities of INS Netaji Subhas and Major Tapamita Gupta, MO at CH (EC). Furthermore, I was subjected to unstatutory summary trial proceedings initiated on January 13, 2023, without being provided the mandatory notice for the aforementioned allegations. During this

Click Here to Read the rest of this document