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

2026 Supreme(Online)(CIC) 5961

CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Radha Raman Tripathy – Appellant
Versus
Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (CCA) Chandigrah – Respondent
CIC/PCNWR/C/2023/626561/CCITC



##PAGE1##

के (cid:574)ीय सूचना आयोग

Central Information Commission

बाबा गंगनाथ माग१, मुिनरका

Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka

नई िद(cid:671)ी, New Delhi – 110067

िशकायत संূा / Complaint No. CIC/ESICO/C/2024/657089

Gaurav Singhal …िशकायतकता१/Complainant

VERSUS

बनाम

CPIO,

Employees State Insurance Corporation

New Delhi ... ঋितवादीगण /Respondents

Date of Hearing : 09/03/2026

Date of interim Decisions : 0 9/03/2026 & 27.03.2026

INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Ashutosh Chaturvedi

Relevant facts emerging from Second Appeal/Complaint:

RTI application filed on 22/10/2024

CPIO replied on 10/12/2024

First appeal filed on Not on record

FAA’s order dated Not on record

Complaint dated 24/12/2024

Information sought:

The complainant has filed RTI application dated 22/10/2024 seeking the

following information:

“I request you to kindly provide me with the CCTV footage from the following

areas for the dates from 12 October 2024 to 19 October 2024 during the lunch

hours:

1. Corridors

2. Lunch area/canteen

3. Classrooms

4. Hallways

Second Appeal/ Complaint No. CIC/ESICO/C/2024/657089 Page 1 of 7

1 / 8

##PAGE2##

5. Cafeteria

6. Any other areas where students usually gather during lunch hours

Time Duration for Requested Footage:

From start time of lunch hours to end time of lunch hours each day, from 12

October 2024 to 19 October 2024.

Please provide the footage in digital format (USB drive, DVD, etc.), or you may

send it via WhatsApp to my number: ******0552 or the email address provided

below….”

2. The CPIO has furnished a reply to the complainant dated 10/12/2024

stated as under:

“Kindly refer to your RTI Application no. ESICO/R/E24/03513 dated:

22.10.2024, requesting therein to provide information under RTI Act- 2005. The

requisite information is enclosed.

It is further informed that applicant may prefer first appeal under 19(1) of RTI

Act, 2005, against the decision of CPIO, within thirty days of the receipt of this

communication before Dr. Nagaraj M., Dean, ESIC Dental College & Hospital,

Sec-15, Rohini, Delhi-89.”

3. The complainant did not file the first appeal with the First Appellate

Authority.

4. Challenging the reply of the CPIO, the complainant filed the Instant

Complaint on 24/12/2024.

Written Submission of the Respondent dated 05/03/2026 is taken on record

5. Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:

The following were present:-

Complainant: Absent

Respondent: Sovan Bera (Authorized Representative for the CPIO) participated

in the hearing in person

The complainant has not availed the opportunity to participate in the hearing

despite due notice of hearing. The Respondent submits that the CCTV recording

from 12.10.2024 to 19.10.2024 are not available in NVR.

Further during the hearing, the Commission had explicitly directed the

Authorized Representative of the CPIO to file a detailed affidavit stating the

specific reason as to why the CCTV footage was deleted within a span of one

month by the end of the day

Second Appeal/ Complaint No. CIC/ESICO/C/2024/657089 Page 2 of 7

2 / 8

##PAGE3##

DECISION

In the light of the facts of the case, the material on record and the submission

made by the Authorized Representative of the CPIO, the commission had directed

him during the course of hearing to file a detailed affidavit to the commission

stating the specific reason as to why the CCTV footage was deleted within a span

of one month and it is noted with serious concern that despite the clear direction

of the Commission, the Authorized Representative has failed to file the said

affidavit and has thereby willfully disobeyed and not complied with the lawful

directions of the Commission.

The Commission further observes that the blatant denial of the information sought

by the complainant without furnishing any justification or supporting evidence,

reflects a mala fide intention on the part of the CPIO to withhold the information

in violation of the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005.

The Commission also takes serious note of the absence of the CPIO during the

hearing, which has deprived the Commission of necessary clarifications and

demonstrates

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top