के (cid:574)ीय सूचना आयोग Central Information Commission बाबा गंगनाथ माग१,मुिनरका

Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka नई िद(cid:671)ी, New Delhi – 110067 ि(cid:554)तीय अपील संূा / Second Appeal No. (As Per Annexure)

Rajnish Ratnakar … अपीलकता१/Appellant VERSUS बनाम CPIO: Department of Administrative Reforms and …ঋितवादीगण/Respondent Public Grievances, New Delhi Relevant dates emerging from the appeal(s):

Sl. No. Second Date of Date of Date of Date of Date of Appeal RTI CPIO’s First FAA’s Second No. Application Reply Appeal Order Appeal

1. 658235 27.09.2024 21.10.2024 17.11.2024 09.12.2024 Nil. 2. 28.08.2024 Not on 02.10.2024 Not on Nil.

651529 record record

3. 30.08.2024 24.09.2024 01.10.2024 Not on Nil.

651501 record

4. 29.08.2024 24.09.2024 03.10.2024 Not on Nil.

651490 record

5. 05.09.2024 27.09.2024 01.10.2024 Not on Nil.

651477 record

6. 12.08.2024 16.08.2024 17.08.2024 Not on Nil.

650798 record

7. 16.08.2024 30.08.2024 31.08.2024 Not on Nil.

650846 record

8. 650819 22.08.2024 30.08.2024 30.08.2024 Not on Nil.

record The instant set of appeals have been clubbed for decision as these relate to similar RTI Applications and same subject matter.

Date of Hearing: 09.09.2025 Date of Decision: 09.09.2025 CORAM:

Hon’ble Commissioner _ANANDI RAMALINGAM O R D E R Second Appeal No. CIC/DARPG/A/2024/658235

1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 27.09.2024 seeking information on the following points:

 If has been informed to me by CPIO that this email id which is uploaded by DARPG as email id of secretary is not email id of secretary DARPG through this rti reply Now kindly provide me information under RTI act 2005

1. Whether the CPIO who have replied to this rti application is CPIO of that section or not whose email address has been mentioned in this reply and if he is not CPIO of that section then how he has provided me this information

2. whether Shri Sanjeev kr yadav of DARPG has responded me after receiving this mail which has been replied and mentioned by concerned CPIO or not

3. whether Shri Manoj kumar upadhayay has taken action on 15th may 2024 on my representation mail sent to same email id or not and written letter to secretary of ministry of labour and employment govt of India

4. Now provide me reason that why no administrative actions and decision has been taken on my annexed mail which is subject matters of annexed rti application this time by public authority of DARPG

1.1. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 21.10.2024 and the same is reproduced as under :-

“The information sought in your RTI application is clarificatory in nature and non-existing clarification, advice or opinion are not covered under the definition of INFORMATION as provided in Section 2(f) of the Right to Information (RTI)

Act 2005.

As such, no information is available in terms of Section 2(f) of the Right to Information Act 2005 to provide in response to your application.”

1.2. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 17.11.2024 alleging that the information provided was incomplete, false and misleading. The FAA vide order dated 09.12.2024 upheld the reply given by the CPIO.

1.3. Aggrieved with the FAA’s order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated Nil.

Second Appeal No. CIC/DARPG/A/2024/651529

2. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 28.08.2024 seeking information on the following points:

 RTI is transferred, for point no. 3 & 4, under section 6(3) of the RTI Act.

(3) Unduly delaying and keeping PG file pending for more than 30 days by PGO who is public servant is punishable offence under section 198 and 199 of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita 2023 or not (4) That if unduly delaying and prolonging this very important PG related with corruption causing injury to more than 25 lakhs poor and marginalized honorary anganwadi workers and helpers, then this offence have been committed by how many public servants in this matter

2.1. Having not received any response from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a F