Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(CIC) 3661
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Vinod Kumar Tiwari, IC
Ravinder Kumar Kaushik – Appellant
Versus
PIO, Central Public Works Department, Office of the Executive Engineer – Respondent
CIC/CPWWR/A/2023/148931 | CIC/CPWWR/C/2024/602158
For the Appellant/Complainant: Not Present
For the Respondent: Shri S K Mishra, Assistant Engineer (Planning)
Timely response to RTI applications is essential; delays are not penalized without evidence of mala fides.
Headnote:(A) Right to Information Act, 2005 - Section 18 - Delay in providing information - The appellant filed RTI requests seeking details about security arrangements of CGS colony and related queries, but received no timely response from the CPIO. The Commission found the CPIO's reply, provided later, to be adequate though delayed, directing caution for the future without imposing penalties as no mala fides were established. (Paras 9, 10, 12)
(B) Non-receipt of information - The Commission emphasized the necessity for timely responses adhering to the RTI Act, acknowledging that genuine mistakes shouldn’t incur penalties unless backed by mala fides. (Paras 10, 11)
Facts of the case:
The appellant filed an RTI application but did not receive responses within stipulated time, leading to the current appeal. Multiple issues related to security and maintenance of the CGS colony were raised.
Findings of Court:
CPIO’s delayed response was acknowledged, with no penalties imposed due to lack of ill intent.
Issues: Key issues included the adequacy and timeliness of responses under RTI provisions.
Ratio Decidendi: Delay in responses was noted, yet not actionable under Section 18(2) of the RTI Act unless mala fides were proven against the CPIO.
Result: Appeals disposed of without penalties against the CPIO.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. timeliness and adequacy of rti responses are critical. (Para 1 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. penalties require proof of ill intent or mala fides. (Para 9 , 10 , 12) |
…Complainant VERSUS बनाम PIO, Central Public Works Department, Office of the Executive Engineer, 7th Floor, CGO Complex, CBD Belapur, Navi Mumbai – 400614 ….(cid:29)ितवादीगण /Respondent Date of Hearing : 23.06.2025 Date of Decision : 30.06.2025 INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari The above-mentioned second appeal/complaint are clubbed together as the Appellant/Complainant is common and subject-matter is similar in nature and hence are being disposed of through a common order.
CIC/CPWWR/A/2023/148931 Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 19.09.2023 CPIO replied on : Not on record First appeal filed on : 22.10.2023 First Appellate Authority’s order : Not on record
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 29.12.2023 Information sought:
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 19.09.2023 (online) seeking the following information:
“I want to seek the following information in respect of Ekta Vihar CGS colony, CBD Belapur, Navi Mumbai-400614, under the RTI Act-2005:
1. Who is responsible for the security arrangements of the CGS colony (mentioned above)?
2. Whether any contract has been awarded by CPWD in past regarding security arrangements of the above?
3. Who is responsible to install the CCTV cameras in the CGS colony?
4. Is there any CGS Colony under jurisdiction of CPWD, Mumbai Division, where CCTV cameras are installed by CPWD?
4. What is the responsibility of CPWD officials/officers maintaining any CGS colony in terms of its security arrangements?
5. Is there any provision in the CPWD manual/rules etc., to make arrangements for the security by recovering the subscription directly from the salary of the residents of the colony?
6. Who should be held responsible for negligence, if any theft occurs in the CGS colony?
7. Number of visits conducted by the CPWD officers (not below the rank of Superintending Engineers) along with dates, during the period from
01-January 2022 to 31-08-2023.
8. Any significant observations noticed during the above visits?
9. Is there any permission granted to Airtel, Jio-Fiber etc., (during the period from 01.01.2022 to 01.09.2023) by any CPWD officers for installation of their devices in the staircase area of Ekta Vihar Colony? If yes, copy of the same may also be provided?
10. Are the private Vendors (as detailed above) allowed to use electricity from the common meters available for the residents? if No, who is responsible to take care of the same?
11.What is the contact number of the competent authority to register a complaint for violation, in case of above situation?
12. Who makes the bill payment of the electricity provided in the common area such as staircase?”
2. Not having received any response from the CPIO, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 22.10.2023. The FAA order is not on record.
3. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
CIC/CPWWR/C/2024/602158 Relevant facts emerging from complaint:
RTI application filed on : 19.09.2023 CPIO replied on : 28.12.2023 First appeal filed on : 22.10.2023 First Appellate Authority’s order : Not on record
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 14.12.2023 Information sought:
4. The Complainant filed an RTI application dated 19.09.2023 (online)
seeking the following information:
“I want to seek the following information in respect of Ekta Vihar CGS colony, CBD Belapur, Navi Mumbai-400614, under the RTI Act-2005:
1. Who is responsible for the security arrangements of the CGS colony (mentioned above)?
2. Whether any contract has been awarded by CPWD in past regarding security arrangements of the above?
3. Who is responsible to install the CCTV cameras in the CGS colony?
4. Is there any CGS Colony under jurisdiction of CPWD, Mumbai Division, where CCTV cameras are installed by CPWD?
5. What is the responsibility of CPWD officials/officers main
