The CPIO is not obligated to create information or respond to unsupported claims under the RTI Act.

O R D E R

1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 31.01.2023 seeking information on the following points:

By this RTI I require Financial year 2016-17 and onwards till yet, report by your office including your state Audit offices report in respect of Audit conducted to different regional offices of DGFT.

Recovery of ineligible amount of TED obtained in respect of supply of goods before issuance pf ARO.

In Each incident where such instances were reported by your office.

(i) Copy of Audit report (ii) LAR Local Audit Report (iii) Statements of Facts (iv) Draft audit para (v) Audit Paragraphs (vi) Replies received by DGFT in respect of such objections where cases are reported Recovery of ineligible amount of TED obtained in respect of supply of goods before issuance pf ARO.

2. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 01.03.2023 and the same is reproduced as under:-

No such instances were reported in any of the audit reports pertaining to DGFT.

i-vi: As per records of this office, the information sought is not available.

3. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 03.03.2023 alleging that the information provided was incomplete, false and misleading. The FAA vide order dated 06.03.2023 stated that:

Your appeal pertains to office of the Pr. Director General of Audit (I&CA), New Delhi. Your appeal has already been send to above mentioned office vide this office letter No. 588- RTI/362-2023 dated 03.03.2023 under intimation to you vide letter No. 589-RTI/362-2023 dated 03.03.2023.

4. Aggrieved with the FAA’s order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated Nil.

5. The appellant’s counsel Advocate Bhawesh Phular, and on behalf of the respondent Shri Hanesh Kapur, CPIO and Shri Kapil, AAO, attended the hearing in-person.

6. The appellant inter alia submitted that the reply given by the respondent was false and misleading since certain reports had come to their notice, which were intentionally withheld by the respondent.

7. The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted and re-confirmed that no such instances, as referred to in the RTI application, were reported in any of the audit reports pertaining to DGFT. The respondent further submitted that no reports were shared by the appellant in the RTI application, hence, they reiterated that no such report was available under their custody.

8. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both parties and perusal of records, observes that appropriate reply was given by the respondent, as per records available under their custody. Further, the respondent having confirmed the same, the CPIO cannot be compelled to create or aprobate/reprobate the claims of the applicant under the provisions of the RTI Act. In view of the above, no further action is warranted in the matter. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.

Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.