Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(CIC) 2489
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Vinod Kumar Tiwari, Information Commissioner
Namoram Meena – Appellant
Versus
CPIO, MILITARY ENGINEER SERVICE (HQ) – Respondent
CIC/MESER/A/2024/608192
For the Appellant: Nil
For the Respondent: Shri Vivek Omar, Shri Vinod Kumar Parmar
The Right to Information Act mandates disclosure of existing information, not the creation of new information or decision-making on pending administrative matters.
Headnote:(A) Right to Information Act, 2005 - Sections 18 and 25 - RTI application filed seeking information regarding action taken on representations - CPIO's reply indicating that some representations were not received - CPIO obliged to disclose existing information only - No infirmity found in handling RTI request. (Paras 6, 7)
(B) RTI Act - Public Authority's obligation - RTI Act mandates disclosure of existing information and does not obligate creation of information or compel decision-making on pending matters. (Paras 7)
Facts of the case:
Appellant filed RTI application seeking action taken reports on representations sent to Special Reservation Cell, mentioning failures in receiving responses on his representations, leading to dissatisfaction and subsequent appeal.
Findings of Court:
The RTI request was handled correctly, with the Respondent clarifying the status of all representations and the limitations in the CPIO's role.
Issues: The main issue was whether the CPIO fulfilled their duty in providing requested information and clarifying the status of representations.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court emphasized that the CPIO is only obligated to provide existing information under the RTI Act and cannot be held responsible for not having information not pertained to their jurisdiction.
Result: The appeal is dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. rti application filing and initial responses. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. respondent's defense and submitted documents. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. court's findings on cpio's obligations. (Para 6 , 7) |
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka नई िद(cid:24)ी, New Delhi – 110067 File No: CIC/MESER/A/2024/608192 Namoram Meena .….अपीलकता(cid:18)/Appellant VERSUS बनाम CPIO, MILITARY ENGINEER SERVICE (HQ), ENGINEER IN CHIEF BRANCH, KASHMIR HOUSE, RAJAJI MARG, NEW DELHI-110011 ….(cid:29)ितवादीगण /Respondent Date of Hearing : 01.07.2025 Date of Decision : 04.07.2025 INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 14.10.2023 CPIO replied on : 10.01.2024 First appeal filed on : 21.01.2024 First Appellate Authority’s order : 22.02.2024 2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 25.02.2024 Information sought:
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 14.10.2023 (online) seeking the following information:
“(a) Action taken report on my factual application bearing No NRM/PC/02/Pers dt 17 Jun 2023 sent via Regd Post No RE899358345IN to the Liaison Officer Special Reservation Cell Military Engineer Services, E-In-Cs Br Kashmir House Rajaji Marg, New Delhi-110011 (b) The Enquiry/Investigation report on my representation bearing No NRM/APAR/2021-22/02/Pers dt 21.06.2022 sent to the Liaison Officer Special Reservation Cell Military Engineer Services, E-In-Cs Br Kashmir House Rajaji Marg, New Delhi-110011 (c) The comments asked on my representation bearing No NRM/Work-18 dt 20.04.2023 regd withdrawal of show cause notices as informed vide special reservation cell letter No B/23440/SC/ST/Liaison Officer/SRC dt
17.05.2023 (d) The comments asked on my representation bearing No NRM/Work- 17 dt 20.04.2023 regd alleged cyber enquiry as informed vide special reservation cell letter No B/23440/SC/ST/Liaison Officer/SRC dt
17.05.2023”
2. The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 10.01.2024 stating as under:
“your RTI Application has been disposed and dispatched vide this office letter NO. B/78001/Jt DG(Pers)/RTI/CSCC dated 09 Jan 2024. The copies of the sought information have been enclosed with the referred letter.”
3. Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 21.01.2024.
The FAA vide its order dated 22.02.2024, held as under:
“It is seen that the RTI was assigned to the concerned CPIO on 01 Dec 2023 only, CPIO requested the applicant to deposit money required for info on 02 Jan 2024. The money was deposited on 05 Jan 2024. CPIO furnished available info on 08 Jan 2024 (06-07 Jan 2024 being holiday on account of Saturday and Sunday). Contention of the applicant that CPIO had denied to provide requested info is not in order.”
4. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Absent Respondent: Shri Vivek Omar, Director/CPIO and Shri Vinod Kumar Parmar, Jt.
Director, appeared in person.
5. The Respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that they had filed detailed written submissions dated 18.06.2025 disclosing complete facts of the case and requested the Commission to place the same on record, copy of the same was sent to the Appellant. The relevant paras of the written submission are reproduced as under:
1. “Refer CIC Notice of hearing No. CIC/MESER/A/2024/608192 dt
09.06.2025.
2. Appellant has sought following information through RTI dt 14.10.2023 as under:-
(a) Action taken report on my factual application bearing No. NRM/PC/02/Pers dt 17 Jun 2023 sent via Regd Post No RE899358345IN to the Liaison Officer Special Reservation Cell Military Engineer Services, E-in-
Cs Branch Kashmir House Rajaji Marg, New Delhi-110011.
(b) The Enquiry / Investigation report on my representation bearing No NRM/APAR/2021-22/02/Pers dt 21.06.2022 sent to the Liaison Officer Special Reservation Cell Military Engineer Services, E-in-Cs Branch Kashmir House Rajaji Marg, New Delhi-110011.
(c)
