SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(CIC) 4384

CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
DEVRAJ PHOGAT – Appellant
Versus
Northern Coalfield Ltd. – Respondent
CIC/NCFLT/A/2025/115410



के न्द्रीय सूचना आयोग Central Information Commission बाबा गंगनाथ मागग, मुननरका

Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka नई निल्ली, New Delhi – 110067 File No: CIC/DOIPP/A/2025/634373 Charanjeet Singh .….अपीलक VERSUS बनाम CPIO : Ministry of Commerce and ….प्रनर्वािीगण /Respondent Industry, Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade (DPIIT)

Trade Mark Registry, Boudhik Sampada Bhawan, SM Road, Antop Hill, Mumbai-400037.

Date of Hearing : 06-04-2026 Date of Decision : 06-04-2026 INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Khushwant Singh Sethi Relevant facts emerging from appeal:

RTI application filed on : 19-02-2025 CPIO replied on : 18-03-2025 First appeal filed on : 23-03-2025 First Appellate Authority’s order : 11-04-2025 2nd Appeal dated : 02-08-2025 Information sought:

1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 19-02-2025 seeking the following information:

“Pursuant to the provisions of the Right to Information Act, 2005, I hereby request detailed information, along with supporting documents, regarding the issuance of the Search Report/Examination Report for Application No. 2616135 during its registration process. Specific Information Requested:- 1. Mode of Communication of Search Report:- Kindly provide details on how the applicant or the authorized agent was informed about the issuance of the Search Report following the examination of Application No. 2616135. Was the communication sent via email, or was it served through registered post ? If it was sent via email, kindly furnish a copy of the email, showing the senders email ID, recipients email ID(s), and the date time of transmission. If it was dispatched via registered post, please provide the postal registry number, date of dispatch, recipients name address, and copies of the relevant postal records. Or may it was not served due to certain reasons 2. Recipient of the Search Report: Please confirm whether the Search Report was served to the applicant or the authorized agent. Provide their name details with copies of letters Kindly furnish copies of all pertinent documents related to the communication of the Search Report to the concerned party. 3. Implementation of Email-Based Intimation System: Please provide information on the official date when the department commenced the practice of serving Search Reports via email instead of traditional postal methods or along with traditional method I request that the aforementioned details be provided in compliance with the RTI Act, 2005. If any part of this request falls outside the purview of disclosure under the Act, kindly indicate the relevant exemption clause with justification. Thank you for your cooperation. I look forward to your response within the stipulated timeframe as prescribed under the RTI Act.”

2. The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 18-03-2025 stating as under:

“With regard to the query no (1) to (3) it is inform you that all the information are readily available in our official website of https://tmrsearch.ipindia.gov.in/eregister/”

3. Being dissatisfied, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 23-03-2025.

The FAA vide its order dated 11-04-2025, upheld the reply given by the CPIO.

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

Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:

The following were present:-

Appellant: Attended the hearing in person.

Respondent: Mr. Abhishek, CPIO, attended the hearing through video conference.

5. The Appellant stated that he sought details regarding how the applicant or the authorized agent was informed about the issuance of the Search Report following the examination of Application No. 2616135, documents related to the communication of the Search Report to the concerned party etc. The appellant submitted that the respondent had not provided the sought information.

6. The Respondent submitted that the sought information is available on their website and they had provided the website link to the appellant vide letter dated 18.03.2025.

7. The Commis

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top