RTI queries on administrative actions require substantive response under RTI Act, not deflection via High Court rules for certified copies.

ORDER 

Complaint No. CIC/PRGHC/C/2024/655373

1. The Complainant filed an RTI application dated 17.07.2024 seeking information on the following points:

1.1. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 14.08.2024 and the same is reproduced as under:-

“The applicant has provided insufficient details (only IGRS number), therefore, it is not possible to trace out the said letter.

The applicant is requested to send a copy of letter dated 01.07.2024 through which the complaint in question bearing No. DEPOJ/E/2024/0002097, Dated 17.04.2024 made by him to the Department of Justice, Ministry of Law and Justice, Government of India, New Delhi, forwarded to Government of U.P. with IGRS No. 60000240081358 was sent to the Registrar General of this Hon'ble High Court for necessary action.”

1.2. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Complainant filed a First Appeal dated 16.08.2024 alleging that the information provided was incomplete, false and misleading. The FAA vide order dated 09.09.2024 directed the following:

“As regards the contention made by the applicant/complainant in his instant First Appeal that the CPIO has not provided details and refused access to information as requested by him and also mentioned that he had lodged a complaint no. DEPOJ/E/2024/0002097 in Ministry of Law and Justice, Government of India, New Delhi, which was forwarded to Government of U.P. and registered as IGRS No. xxxxx81358 and further contention that in the aforesaid complaint disposal that the letter was sent to the Registrar General, High Court, Allahabad on 1 July 2024 and at the end he requested to provide information is concerned, after a perusal of the record it shows that reply of the CPIO through letter dated 14.08.2024 is not proper. As such, the CPIO is directed to reconsider the aforesaid RTI Application dated 17.07.2024, made by the applicant/complainant under RTI Act, 2005 afresh and inform him to the extent permissible under RTI Act, 2005 read with The Allahabad High Court (Right to Information) Rules, 2006 within 30 days of this order.”

In compliance of the FAA’s order, the CPIO provided the following response vide letter dated 19.10.2024:

“In compliance with the first appeal order dated 09.09.2024 of Learned Registrar General/First Appellate Authority, passed in First appeal bearing registration no. HCALD/A/2024/60187 dated 16.08.2024, preferred by you against the reply dated 14.08.2024, you are hereby informed that your RTI application bearing registration no. HCALD/R/2024/60504 dated 17.07.2024 has been reconsidered in the light of provision contained in the Right to Information Act, 2005 read with the Allahabad High Court (Right to Information) Rules, 2006, and after reconsideration its reply is as under :-

The multiple complaints of Shri Kuldeep Kumar, Advocate have been received in the concerned section regarding corruption in Gautam Buddh Nagar Judgeship, and have been filed vide order dated 04.10.2024 of Hon'ble the Chief Justice.

Copy of order dated 04.10.2024 passed by Hon'ble the Chief Justice, sought by the applicant cannot be provided under Right to Information Act, 2005 as the same is barred by Rule 25 of Allahabad High Court (Right to Information) Rules, 2006 and it may be obtained by adhering to the procedure as provided in The Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952.”

1.3. Aggrieved with the FAA’s order, the Complainant approached the Commission with the instant Complaint dated 12.12.2024.

Complaint No. CIC/PRGHC/C/2024/655371

2. The Complainant filed an RTI application dated 17.11.2024 seeking information on the following points:

2.1. The CPIO replied vide lette