The absence of the appellant in a RTI appeal hearing can lead to dismissal if the respondent's compliance with RTI Act is uncontested.

Headnote:(A) Right to Information Act, 2005 - Sections 7 and 19 - RTI application for tracking details of a consignment - Appellant claimed incomplete and misleading information provided by CPIO - The Commission upheld the CPIO’s response, finding it appropriate based on maintained records. (Paras 3, 7)

(B) Absence of Appellant - The absence of the Appellant during the hearing resulted in dismissal of the appeal as the respondent's explanation remained uncontested. (Par 6)

Facts of the case:
Appellant requested information regarding delivery reports of several parcels, alleging misleading information from the CPIO. The FAA upheld the CPIO's response.

Findings of Court:
The Commission found that records supported the CPIO’s response, and the Appellant’s absence meant no counterarguments were presented.

Issues: The primary issue was whether the information provided by the CPIO was adequate and addressed the Appellant's claims regarding its completeness.

Ratio Decidendi: The court found no interference was warranted with the CPIO's appropriate reply in the absence of the Appellant.

Result: Appeal dismissed.

Table of Content
1. rti request regarding consignment details (Para 1 , 3 , 4)
2. response from cpio and faa upheld (Para 2 , 5)
3. absenteeism in appeal dismissed (Para 6 , 7)

Hon’ble Commissioner _ANANDI RAMALINGAM O R D E R

1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 08.01.2024 seeking information on the following points:

 Request for information regarding speed post tracking status of consignment delivery report of following tracking no RI797571603IN, RI797571501IN, RI797571594IN RI797571585IN  I am petitioner of vyavahar nyayalay rampur baghelan I summon document of vyavahar nyayalay through above tracking Id of consignment but recipient is deny of receiving consignment so kindly provide following

1. Status of complete delivery report Details of acknowledgement slip is attached below Details of consignment RI797571501IN Date -26/07/2023 To Krishna Devi Devmau RI797571603IN Date -26/07/2023 To Arunendra Singh Devmau RI797571594IN Date-26.07/2023 To Savitri Devi Devmau RI797571585IN Date -26/07/2023 To Jitendra Singh Devmau

2. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 13.02.2024 and the same is reproduced as under :-

1. Delivery detail of given registered posts are as follows:-

S. No.	Tracking Id	Delivery Status
1	RI797571501IN	Delivered to Shri Shiv Kumar Dwivedi on dated 01.08.2023 at Deomau Daldal B.O. under Ramvan S.O.
2	RI797571603IN	Delivered to Shri Shiv Kumar Dwivedi on dated 01.08.2023 at Deomau Daldal B.O. under Ramvan S.O.
3	RI797571594IN	Delivered to Shri Shiv Kumar Dwivedi on dated 01.08.2023 at Deomau Daldal B.O. under Ramvan S.O.
4	RI797571585IN	Delivered to Shri Shiv Kumar Dwivedi on dated 01.08.2023 at Deomau Daldal B.O. under Ramvan S.O.

3. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 26.02.2024 alleging that the information provided was incomplete, false and misleading. The FAA vide order dated 20.03.2024 upheld the reply given by the CPIO.

4. Aggrieved with the FAA’s order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 08.04.2024.

5. The appellant remained absent and on behalf of the respondent Pramod Shankar, Assistant Suptd. of Posts, attended the hearing through video conference.

6. The respondent while defending their case inter alia endorsed their initial reply dated 13.02.2024. He explained that a delay of 5 days in responding to the RTI application occurred due to administrative reasons and the same was unintentional.

7. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing the respondent and perusal of records, observes that the CPIO has provided an appropriate reply to the RTI Application as per records maintained at their end. Further, in the absence of the Appellant to plead his case or contest the CPIO’s submissions, the Commission finds no scope of intervention in the matter. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.

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

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2025 Supreme(Online)(CIC) 2786

CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSIONAnandi Ramalingam, ICNaveen Singh – AppellantVersusDepartment of Post, Satna, MP – RespondentSecond Appeal No. CIC/POSTS/A/2024/614966

The absence of the appellant in a RTI appeal hearing can lead to dismissal if the respondent's compliance with RTI Act is uncontested.

CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Anandi Ramalingam, IC
Naveen Singh – Appellant
Versus
Department of Post, Satna, MP – Respondent
Second Appeal No. CIC/POSTS/A/2024/614966