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/DOFPR/C/2024/101581 Darshan Lal ….िशकायतकता(cid:18) /Complainant VERSUS बनाम PIO Directorate of Printing, Govt. of India Press, 1, Temple Street, Kolkata - 700072 ….(cid:27)ितवादीगण /Respondent Date of Hearing : 23.04.2025 Date of Decision : 02.05.2025 INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari Relevant facts emerging from complaint:

RTI application filed on : 03.11.2023 CPIO replied on : 30.11.2023 First appeal filed on : 07.12.2023 First Appellate Authority’s order : 01.01.2024 2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 15.01.2024 Information sought:

1. The Complainant filed an RTI application (offline) dated 03.11.2023 seeking the following information:

“1. Please confirm, Promotion Order No. A-32012/3/2022-Admin.II Prtg- UD, dated 31.10.2023 has been received in the GIP, Temple Street, Kolkata from the Directorate of Printing through E-mail at 12.37 PM on

31.10.2023.

2. Please confirm, Transfer/Posting Order No. A-32012/3/2022-Admin.II Prtg-UD, dated 31.10.2023 has been received in the GIP, Temple Street, Kolkata from the Directorate of Printing through E-mail at 06.44 PM on

31.10.2023.

3. Please provide copies of above E-mail messages, if received in the GIP, Temple Street, Kolkata from the Directorate of Printing at 12.37 PM on

31.10.2023 and 06.44 PM on 31.10.2023.

4. Please provide copy of Office Order No. 49 (FC.24D/2023-24/Estt), dated 31.10.2023 issued by the GIP, Temple Street, Kolkata.

5. Please provide copy of E-mail message of sending copy of above Office Order No. 49 (FC.24D/2023-24/Estt), dated 31.10.2023 by the GIP, Temple Street, Kolkata to the Directorate of Printing.”

2. The CPIO furnished a reply to the complainant on 30.11.2023 stating as under:

“1. Since the matter is under Police Verification the information cannot be disclosed under Rule 8(1)(h) of RTI Act 2005.”

2 to 4. -do-“

3. Being dissatisfied, the complainant filed a First Appeal dated 07.12.2023.

The FAA vide its order dated 01.01.2024 upheld the reply of CPIO.

4. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, complainant approached the Commission with the instant Complaint. Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:

5. The following were present:-

Complainant: Shri Darshan Lal along with Shri Tushar, attended the hearing in person.

Respondent: Shri Subir Narayan Garai, CPIO-cum-Deputy Manager, attended the hearing in person.

6. The Complainant stated that the Respondent has not provided the relevant information as sought in the instant RTI Application. He added that the Respondent has denied the information citing Section 8 (1) (h) of the RTI Act without intimating specific reasons, as to how, disclosure of information would impede investigations. He apprised the bench of the fact that Shri N.K. Paria himself acted as the CPIO and also as First Appellate Authority. It is a proven case of misuse of official status as he disrespected the RTI Act and intentionally obstructed flow of information with mala fide intentions. He further reiterated the contents of his written submission dated

17.04.2024, which are under:

“Most Respectfully showeth:

Hearing of above complaint has been fixed on 23.04.2025 at 11.20AM, regarding which, I would like to furnished following submissions with an earnest request to consider and pass necessary order for supply of information as sought vide my RTI Application dated 03.11.2023. Hon'ble Commission is earnestly requested to consider following points:-

1. Shri N.K. Paria himself acted as CPIO and Shri N.K. Paria himself acted as First Appellate Authority. It is a proved case of misuse of official status. He disrespected RTI Act and intentionally obstructed flow of information with mala fide intentions.

2. Following office orders have been placed in dop.nic.in on official website of the department. Promotion and Transfer/Posting orders are placed in Public Domain, hence, it is undisputed that information is