के (cid:3)ीय सूचना आयोग Central Information Commission बाबा गंगनाथ माग(cid:18), मुिनरका

Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka नई िद(cid:24)ी, New Delhi – 110067 File No: CIC/OOCMD/A/2023/136535 Shyamlal Dua .….अपीलकता(cid:18)/Appellant VERSUS बनाम PIO, Chief Minister's Office, A-315, 3rd Level, Delhi Secretariat, New Delhi – 110002 ….(cid:29)ितवादीगण /Respondent Date of Hearing : 30.07.2024 Date of Decision : 13.08.2024 Date of SCN Hearing : 04.09.2025 Date of SCN Decision : 25.09.2025 INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari Relevant facts emerging from appeal:

RTI application filed on : 07.06.2023 CPIO replied on : Not on record First appeal filed on : 10.07.2023 First Appellate Authority’s order : Not on record

2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 28.07.2023 Information sought:

The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 07.06.2023 seeking the following information:

“Kindly refer my application dtd 21-11-2022 addressed to Shri Arvind Kejriwal ji, CM of Delhi, regarding corruption by an officer in the rank of Dy Secy. Finance (Exp-1). This letter was received by SO (Admn.) On 28-11-2022 Vide Diary No 43511 and it was forwarded to CS/ Secretary Finance on 28/11/2022. Kindly arrange to provide the following information relating to this case of corruption/misappropriation of Govt Money.

1. Please provide Cases a copy of rules/procedure adopted for disposing of corruption/mis-appropriation of Govt Money.

2. Please provide a copy of action taken on my application 26-11-2022 along with a copy of note-Shest of the file dealing with the case.

3. Please intimate the reason for not taking any action with a copy of the rule under which no action has been taken.

4. Please provide a copy rule under which my application has been forwarded to the accused officer for investigation and n/a.”

Not having received any response from the PIO, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 10.07.2023. The FAA’s order is not on record.

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

Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing on 30.07.2024:

The following were present:- Appellant: Present in person Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar, Dy. Secretary/PIO, Shri Murali N. SO/APIO, Delhi Secretariate, CM Office, Delhi and Shri Sunil Kumar Sachan, PIO/Dy. Sec. Exp.- IV, Delhi Secretariat appeared in person.

The appellant inter alia submitted that he has filed an RTI application before the PIO, Finance Department, CM office, New Delhi and sought information regarding action taken on his application dated 21.11.2022 and related issues. However, he contended that no information was received till the date of hearing, Shri Rajeev Kumar, Dy. Secretary/PIO, inter alia submitted that RTI application and the first appeal were not received by him. Shri Sunil Kumar Sachan, PIO/Dy. Sec. Exp.- IV, Finance Department, submitted that as per his record no RTI application was received from the appellant.

Order on 13.08.2024:

“The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both the parties and perusal of the records, noted that the appellant sought information regarding action taken on his application dated 21.11.2022 and related issues. As per the records placed before the Commission neither the PIO nor the FAA provided any reply to the appellant till the date of hearing. The respondents who appeared before the Commission submitted that the RTI application and the first appeal were not received by them.

It is noted that the respondents have neither made any attempt to communicate with the Registry of this Bench to obtain a copy of the RTI application nor accessed the records of the application from the web portal accessible by all public authorities. In view of the lackadaisical approach of the PIO and delay caused in the matter and the information sought has not been provided.

In view of the above, Shri Rajeen Kumar, Dy. Secretary/PIO and Shri Sunil Kumar Sachan, PIO/Dy. Sec. Exp.- IV, Delhi Secretariat, Finance Department, ar