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/DSESJ/A/2024/623204 Rajesh Kumar Singhal .….अपीलकता(cid:18)/Appellant VERSUS बनाम PIO, Office of the Principal and Session Judge HQ, Central District, Tis Hazari Court, Delhi – 110054 ….(cid:29)ितवादीगण /Respondent Date of Hearing : 10.09.2025 Date of Decision : 22.09.2025 INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari Relevant facts emerging from appeal:

RTI application filed on : 14.03.2024 CPIO replied on : 12.04.2024 First appeal filed on : 20.04.2024 First Appellate Authority’s order : 20.05.2024 Compliance of FAA order : Not on record

2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 03.06.2024 Information sought:

1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 14.03.2024 (online) seeking the following information:

“Query No. (1) A Representation dt. 12.10.23 was submitted to office of Principal Distsrict and Sessions Judge (HQ)-Central District vide Diary No. 5663/B(copy attached). Thereafter a reply dt. 16.10.23 was submitted by the court of Sh. Jiten Mehra, Ld. ADJ-10, Central THC to Receipt and Issue Branch.

(a) Provide the certified physical copy of abovementioned reply dt. 16/10/2023 submitted by the court of Sh. Jiten Mehra, Ld. ADJ-10, Central, THC to Receipt and issue Branch.

(b) Provide the details of action taken (if any) by Principal District and Sessions Judge (HQ) or any other competent authority.

(2) Another representation dt 12.02.2024 was submitted to office of Principal District and Sessions Judge (HQ)-Central District vide diary No. 755/B. (copy attached). Thereafter a reply was submitted by the court of Sh. Jiten Mehra, Ld. ADJ-10, Central THC to Receipt and issue Branch.

(a) Provide the certified physical copy of abovementioned reply submitted by the court of Sh. Jiten Mehra, Ld. ADJ-10, Central, THC to Receipt and Issue Branch.

(b) Provide the details of action taken (if any) by Principal District and Sessions Judge (HQ) or any other competent authority.”

2. The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 12.04.2024 stating as under:

“In response of reply in query No. 1 & 2, it is submitted that applicant letter dated 12/10/2023 and 12/02/2024 and reply on that letter given by the court of Sh. Jiten Mehra, Ld. ADJ-10, Central District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi was seen and filed by the then Ld. Principal District & Sessions judge (HQs), Central District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi. Moreover the applicant made and another representation on dated 21/03/2024 wherein applicant again requested for the copy of the reply on his representations given by the court of Sh. Jiten Mehra, Ld. ADJ-10, Central District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi and request of the applicant was declined by the Ld. Principal District & Sessions Judge (HQs) Delhi.”

3. Being dissatisfied, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 20.04.2024.

The FAA vide its order dated 20.05.2024, held as under:

“Appellant has sent his exemption for today. The same is taken on record.

This is an appeal filed online by the applicant against reply furnished by CPIO in response to the RTI details sought by the appellant vide his application bearing registration no. PDSJT/R/2024/60038.

Vide this application, the appellant sought details in respect of certain letters written by the court of Sh. Jiten Mehra to Ld. Principal District & Sessions Judge, HQ. It has been brought to my notice that earlier also, on similar RTI query, the appellant preferred an appeal bearing RTI appeal no. 10/2024, which was rejected by the First Appellate Authority vide order dated 23.04.2024. It was a detailed order and the appellant was given the liberty to file Second appeal before the CIC, New Delhi. Instead of approaching CIC, the appellant filed fresh RTI query seeking same information. The appeal is devoid of merits and is dismissed.

Copy of the order be provided to the appellant as well as the PIO.”

4. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, Appellant approac