Room No. – 308, 2nd Floor, August Kranti Bhawan,
Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi – 110066.
: Appellant
File No. CIC/KY/A/2014/001374
Shri Phool Chand
B-48, Sec-15, Noida
Uttar Pradesh-201301
: Public Authority
M/o. Urban Development
Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi-110011
Date of Hearing
Date of Decision
Sh. Phool Chand
Sh. Rajeev Kumar, Section Officer
1. Vide RTI application dated 17.07.2014, the Appellant sought information on the 6 issues.
2. CPIO, vide its response dated 17.02.2014, provided the information to the appellant.
3. The First Appeal (FA) was filed on 04.09.2014, as the desired information was not provided.
4. First Appellate Authority (FAA), vide its order dated 30.09.2014, has not provided the information.
5. Grounds for the Second Appeal filed on 17.12.2014 are contained in the Memorandum of Appeal.
Appellant as well as respondent appeared before the Commission personally and made the
submissions at length.
It is pertinent to mention here that the appellant, vide his RTI Application dated 17.07.2014,
sought information from the respondents on six issues. Respondents, vide their response dated
17.02.2014, allegedly provided the required information to the appellant. Being aggrieved by the
aforesaid response, FA was filed by the appellant on 04.09.2014 before the FAA, vide his order
dated 30.09.2014, disposed of the FA as stated; “the RTI application of Sh. Phool Chand has
never been received in DD.III-Desk, or any desk in Delhi Division. Thus, the information sought by
him cannot be provided”.
2. However, learned FAA, disposed of appellant’s first appeal without application of his mind.
as to whether the complete and categorical information has ever provided to the appellant on all
issues or not. As such, Learned FAA’s order dated 30.09.2014, needs to be quashed and set
aside. Therefore, it is hereby quashed and set aside being not legally tenable.
3. On being queried by the Commission, as to whether first appeal dated 04.09.2014 filed by the
appellant under section 19(1) of the RTI Act 2005 before the Learned FAA was disposed of or
still pending. On this very aspect, it is admitted by Sh. Rajeev Kumar, Section Officer that the First
Appeal filed by the appellant could not be disposed of by the learned FAA. The Commission heard
the submissions made by appellant as well as respondents at length.
-24. The Commission also perused the case-file thoroughly; specifically, nature of issues raised
by the appellant in his RTI application dated 17.07.2014, respondent’s response dated
17.02.2014, FAA’s order dated 30.09.2014 and also the grounds of memorandum of second
5. The Commission is of the considered view that it is a fit case to be remanded back to learned
FAA with a direction to dispose of the Appellant’s FA filed on 04.09.2014, in accordance with the
provisions of RTI Act 2005, within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order under intimation
to the Commission. As such, the case is remanded back.
The Appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Sd/(M.A. Khan Yusufi)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy
(K. L. Das)
Deputy Registrar
M/o. Urban Development
Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi-110011
Shri Phool Chand
B-48, Sec-15, Noida
Uttar Pradesh-201301