Relevant Facts emerging from appeal:

Information sought and background of the case:

The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 28.10.2024 seeking information on the following points:

“उक्त शिकायत पत्र पर की गई जाांच प्रशतवेदन, नोटिीट, शिकायतकतााके कथन / बयान एवां अनावेदक के कथन / बयान के साथ जाांच अशिकाररयोांके स्पष्ट अशिमत की प्रमाशित, सत्याशपत छाया प्रशत प्रदाय करें ।“

Having not received any response from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal on 06.12.2024. Order of FAA is not available on record.

Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.

Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:

The appellant remained absent.

The respondent Mr. Narender Kumar Mittal, AGM & CPIO, was present through video conference.

The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that reply to the RTI application could not be provided to the appellant, as due to receipt of multiple offline RTI applications from the appellant, due to some confusion, the instant RTI application was not traceable in the records and sought apology for the same. The respondent during hearing also stated that they have received the RTI application along with the hearing notice of the Commission and he will provide the information to the appellant as per RTI, at the earliest.

Decision:

The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case and perusal of records, the respondent is directed to provide reply to the appellant, within three weeks after receipt of this order. With this direction, the appeal is disposed.