Shri Kishore Kumar vs Central Bureau Of Investigation

                  CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                   Appeal No. CIC/WB/A/2008/001352 dated 29-7-2008
                     Right to Information Act 2005 - Section 19

Appellant:             Shri Kishore Kumar
Respondent:            Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI)
                             Decision Announced 16.12.'09


FACTS

By an application of 17-4-2008 Shri Kishore Kumar of Najafgarh, New Delhi applied to the CPIO, CBI Shri J. Nayak, Addl. SP, seeking the following information: -

'1. Kindly intimate the status of my above letter/ complaint, which is directly addressed to you.

2. Is any confidential query/ secret investigation or any order made/ pass on behalf of my above complaint/ confidential information?

3. As the concerned organization is with in your jurisdiction and as per CVC circular no. 98/vgl/60 dated 15/4/99 (Regarding rotation of officials). As per Para 1 of my above complaint, kindly intimate that what action have been taken in this regard.

4. I also like to share some more information about the above officials that Mr. J. K. Arora (AE) has bought a house few months back from his undisclosed (black) money and the address is B2/b- 306, Janak Puri, New Delhi-58. there are two RDA nos. 2/288/01 & 2/252/03 and CBI case no. 1842 SIO (P)/ Vig./CBI/2005 & 1867/SIO (P)/Vig./P. C./ 2005 are still pending against Mr. Rakesh Ahuja (JE). As the allegation are specific, serious and having clear vigilance angle against the concerned officials. In this position, what actions do you propose against the above?

5. As per paras 4, 5 and 12 of my above confidential complaint dated 19.3.2008, have you secretly checked the above allegation? Give answer in yes or no. if answer is yes, what have you found?

6. What will be your future action in this regard to stop this type of corruption/ manipulations against these officials and when it will be executed/ completed against above doted (sic) officials?

7. Kindly intimate what is the prescribed time limit to dispose of such cases.

8. Kindly intimate the complete procedure to dispose of such cases.

9. Kindly mention the clear date on which the above application will be decided/ disposed off.

10. Kindly give me the copy of above file and noting there on till date.

11. Kindly give me the policy how long a J. E.,A. E., & E. E.

could hold their pos in the same office and on same designation in the department of works/ maintenance/ building of MCD."

On not receiving a response Shri Kishore Kumar moved an appeal before Appellate Authority Shri N. R. Wasan, JD (P), CBI, Policy Division, on 19-5-2008. Upon this he received a response from DIG, CBI, Shri Sudhir Kumar Saxena informing him as follows:-

"I have gone through the original RTI application of the appellant dated 17.4.2008, the reply of CPIO and the appeal. It is seen that the appellant had sent an RTI application dated 17.4.2008 to CPIO, Policy Division, CBI requesting for information about action taken on his complaint dated 19.3.2008. Policy Division, CBI, transferred the RTI application to CPIO, CBI, ACB, Delhi. The CPIO, ACB, New Delhi has sent a reply to the appellant vide letter No. RTI/ CPIO/26/2008-DLI/5531 dated 21.5.2008. it is seen that the appellant has sent the appeal before the reply was sent to him. The CPIO has sent the reply and hence it is not a case of refusal of information as mentioned in the appeal."

However, it seems he still not received a response to his original application, because Shri Kishore Kumar has moved a second appeal before us with the following prayer:-

"I, therefore, pray your kind honour to provide me the information point wise as requested at the earliest, providing filling charges/ expenses for application & appeals occurred by me for this information i.e. Rs. 1150/- and levied penalties to the concerned (PIO/ appellate etc.) authorities as per RTI Act.' The appeal was heard on 16-12-2009. Only respondent Shri Sumit Sharan, SP, CBI is present. Although informed of the date of hearing through our notice of 27-11-2009 appellant Shri Kishore Kumar opted not to be present.

DECISION NOTICE The appeal in this case hinges on non-receipt of a response to his RTI application by Shri Kishore Kumar. Appellate Authority Shri Sudhir Kumar Saxena, DIG has found that such a reply has, indeed, been sent dated 21-5- 2008. Respondent Shri Sumit Sharan has submitted a copy of this response to us in the hearing. This copy is now appended to this decision for the information of appellant Shri Kishore Kumar. We find that given the fact that Policy Division Cell transferred the RTI application from the Policy Division to CPIO, CBI, ACB, Delhi. This response is within the time limit mandated under section 7 (1). The appeal is, therefore, dismissed. However, should appellant Shri Kishore Kumar not be satisfied with the information now sent he would be free to move an appeal before First Appellate Authority, DIG, CBI, ACR, New Delhi under section 19 (1).

Announced in the hearing. Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.

(Wajahat Habibullah) Chief Information Commissioner 16-12-2009 Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against application and payment of the charges prescribed under the Act to the CPIO of this Commission.

(Pankaj K.P. Shreyaskar) Joint Registrar 16-12-2009