CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Vinod Kumar Tiwari, Information Commissioner
Anil Chander Bagga – Appellant
Versus
PIO – Respondent
Information sought:
I. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 20.01.2023 seeking the following information:
“Sh. P.C. Jain, Joint Secretary (GAD), Govt of Delhi, Sachivalya, I.P. Estate, New Delhi was appointed for inspection of accounts of the vide their letter society dated no.47(498)/GH/G11/NW/4046 26/08/2007. Please provide the inspection report submitted by Sh. P.C. Jain with Assistant Registrar, RCS and the action taken by RCS on his report.
II. The PIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 24.02.2023 stating as under:
“The requisite information sought by the RTI applicant is presently not available in the office record of this section.”
III. Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 13.03.2023. The FAA order is not on record.
IV. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
V. The Commission disposed of the Second Appeal on 23.10.2023 and passed the following observations and directions:
“The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, submission made by both the parties and perusal of records, observes that the First Appellate Authority’s (FAA) order has not been complied
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.