Jump to content
News Ticker
  • NPAs under PM Modi's Mudra scheme jumped 126% in FY19
  • shows RTI
  • RTI query reveals banking frauds of ₹ 2.05 Trillion reported in the last 11 years
  • 509 per cent rise in cases under child labour law: Study
  • The Central Information Commission has allowed disclosure of file notings on the mercy petition of a rape and murder convict, rejecting the government's contention that the records cannot be disclosed as these are privileged documents under Article 74(2) of the Constitution.
  • Electoral bonds worth over ₹5,800 crore were bought by donors to fund political parties between March 1, 2018 and May 10, 2019, a Right to Information reply has said.
  • Don't pay 500/- for answer sheet now- Supreme Court says if Answer sheet is asked under RTI, RTI Fees will be governed
  • 0
amanjs

No reply received from SPIO

Question

amanjs

PLEASE HELP ME

 

Organisation- Haryana Co-operative sugar mills Ltd , Rohtak

 

Drafted an RTI on 12 April 2017 to the concerned SPIO and received no reply

 

As I know the internal organisation structure of the mills I know that the entire administration is corrupt and they are intentionally ignoring my RTI (Truly I have been in that office and seen it myself as I have a relative employee in the mills )

 

As the First Appellate Authority is the Managing director of the mills , I donot expect any reply from him too.

But being a law abiding citizen I am ready to follow the procedures by RTI Law/

But again i do not expect reply from MD as well.

Recently I have heard in case of no reply a citizen can directly approach CIC

 

So I request the esteemed forum members to help me in this case.

 

Please Guide me in this further matter

i) If i should approach the first appeleate authority kindly provide me with what to write and how|

ii) If i should approach CIC , then how to approach CIC haryana and what to write and how to follow up with it, if you can provide me the details , address it would be very very helpful...

 

 

 

I thank in advance to people addressiong my query and providing me a SOLUTION...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0
Deepak Dang

Sir,

FAA will be applied with copy of Application & informing him that reply not recd. Examle

How to File First Appeal under RTI (MODIFY AS REQUIRED)

First Appeal is the statutory remedy available to the RTI Applicant, when there is no response from the Public Information Officer within stipulated time limit or the decision of PIO is not satisfactory or the PIO offered / supplied incorrect / misleading information or demanded exorbitant further fee etc. The First Appeal is required to be filed under Section-19(1) of RTI Act.

Who can file First Appeal?

 

  1. A person who submitted an RTI Application and aggrieved by no response or unsatisfactory reply or incorrect information.
  2. Third Party or parties whom the information sought relates to or has been supplied and treated as Confidential.

Finding First Appellate Authority

 

  1. First Appeal should be filed before the designated First Appellate Authority (FAA), who is an officer higher in rank than PIO.
  2. Details of First Appellate Authority shall be included in PIO's decision letter itself. When there is no response / decision from PIO, it is better to search website (RTI link) of the public authority for FAA details.
  3. Details of FAA can also be obtained through telephone from the office of public authority. Alternatively, if the office of PIO is nearer to applicant, he can visit PIO’s office, where details of PIO / FAA can be gathered from RTI Notice Board.
  4. In case, the applicant is not able to get details or address of FAA, applicant can address First Appeal as “The First Appellate Authority under RTI, Office of ……………………………, and send it to the address of PIO.
  5. First Appeal can also be submitted to APIO for onward submission to FAA. Situations for filing First Appeals and prescribed Time Limits [TABLE]
    [TR]
    [TH]Sl
    [/TH]
    [TH]Situations for filing First Appeal
    [/TH]
    [TH]Time limit for filing First Appeal
    [/TH]
    [/TR]
    [TR]
    [TD]1.
    [/TD]
    [TD]PIO did not respond within 30 days from receipt of RTI Application in his office.
    [/TD]
    [TD]After 30 (+7 days for postal transit time) but within 60 days from the date of receipt of RTI Application at PIO’s Office.
    [/TD]
    [/TR]
    [TR]
    [TD]2.
    [/TD]
    [TD]RTI Application submitted through APIO but PIO did not respond within 30 days from receipt of RTI Application in PIO’s office.
    [/TD]
    [TD]After 35 (+7 days for postal transit time) but within 60 days from the date of receipt of RTI Application at PIO’s Office.
    [/TD]
    [/TR]
    [TR]
    [TD]3.
    [/TD]
    [TD]RTI Application transferred by the original public authority to another public authority (PIO) but transferee PIO did not respond within 30 days from receipt of Application.
    [/TD]
    [TD]After 30 (+7 days for postal transit time) but within 60 days from the date of receipt of RTI Application at transferee PIO’s Office.
    [/TD]
    [/TR]
    [TR]
    [TD]4.
    [/TD]
    [TD]PIO issued notice to third party under section-11(1), but not decided the application within 40 days from receipt of application at his office.
    [/TD]
    [TD]After 40 (+7 days for postal transit time) but within 70 days from the date of receipt of RTI Application at PIO’s Office.
    [/TD]
    [/TR]
    [TR]
    [TD]5.
    [/TD]
    [TD]PIO's decision under Section-11(3)
    [/TD]
    [TD]Within 30 days from the date of receipt of PIO’s decision.
    [/TD]
    [/TR]
    [TR]
    [TD]6.
    [/TD]
    [TD]PIO responded but Applicant is not satisfied with decision of PIO or fee demanded is exorbitant or incorrect, incomplete information is supplied etc.
    [/TD]
    [TD]Within 30 days from the date of receipt of decision of PIO by Applicant.
    [/TD]
    [/TR]
    [/TABLE]
    What to write in an Appeal?
    • Brief facts: Narrate brief facts leading to first appeal e.g
      • Filing of RTI Application before PIO and it's date
      • What information was/were sought,
      • PIO's decision or deemed denial,
      • what information was/were supplied and
      • what was not supplied or why aggrieved.

 

[*]Grounds for appeal: These are logical reasons indicating how and why PIO erred in his decision. At the same time, provisions of rules supporting applicant's stand or correct course of action expected from PIO and the reason to buttress such action should be written clearly. Each such point should be written as a separate ground.

[*]Personal Hearing: FAA is required to grant personal hearing to Appellant in compliance of principles of natural justice. Appellant desirous to be heard by FAA shall mention it at the end of appeal. In case attending such hearing is not convenient to Appellant, he may not include such request in his appeal. It is not mandatory to appear for First Appeal hearings.

[*]Prayers : Appellant must clearly indicate the decision required to be given by FAA. Few of such prayers are -

[*]condone the delay in submission of appeal;

[*]grant personal hearing before deciding the appeal;

[*]direct the PIO to supply information within 10 days from the date of decision of the appeal;

[*]direct the PIO to supply information free of cost, since PIO failed to supply information within 30 days;

[*]direct PIO to supply full and correct information; direct PIO to supply certified copies of information;

[*]record and supply reasons for upholding the decision of PIO and rejecting the prayers of the appellant etc. etc.

[*]Sign the Appeal at right bottom with date.

[*]There is no fee and specific format for first appeal to Public Authorities under Central Government.

[*]However, there is prescribed fee and format for First Appeals in certain states. Before you draft first appeal to states, please check RTI Rules of respective State for First Appeal fee, its mode of payment as well as prescribed format of appeal (if any).

[*]self attested photo copy of RTI Application,

[*]self attested copy of PIO’s reply (if any),

[*]any other document(s) supporting the grounds and pleadings in appeal.

[*]Self-attested means, at the bottom of photo copy, write ‘Attested’ and below that put full signature.

[*]Appeal Fee & Format

[*]Documents to be attached with first appeal:

[*]Submit First Appeal by Speed Post or Registered Post AD. Check delivery status through India Post website and take a printout of delivered status and keep on record. India Post - Track Consignments

[*]You can deliver personally also, but it is always better to mail all your RTI related communications by registered post AD or by Speed Post. Never use Courier services for submitting RTI documents.

[*]When you send more than one First Appeal on a day, please ensure to put different date on each of them, in order to distinguish response of FAA on each of them.

[*]Preserve one set of appeal with its enclosures, Original postal receipt and AD receipt or Speed Post delivery status print out in one bunch/folder.

Sample Facts and Grounds for First Appeal

Brief facts of the case

I have preferred Application dt: ………. under section-6(1) read with Sec-3 of the Right to Information Act, 2005, before The SPIO & …………. … and demanded following information.

(1) …………………..

(2) …………………..

(3) …………………..

Copy of RTI Application is attached as Annexure-A to this appeal.

In case of No response: The said Application was received and acknowledged by the office of PIO on …………… As per Section-7(1) of the RTI Act, the PIO is required to decide RTI application within 30 days from the date of its receipt. However, the PIO did not decide the application within the stipulated time.

OR

In case of Exorbitant Fee: The SPIO decided the said RTI Application in terms of Section-7(1) of Act and communicated further Fee for providing information vide communication dt: ………………….. . SPIO demanded Application fee of Rs. 7980 for 798 cases and Rs. 4788 towards document charges for 798 pages. The Fee demanded by SPIO is unreasonable and in total contravention of the proviso under Section-7(5), which stipulates that the fee prescribed under Sub-Section(1) of Section-6 and sub-section(1) and (5) of Section-7 shall be reasonable. The Fee thus prescribed is Rs.10 per RTI Application and Rs.2 per page of A4 information.

OR

In case of denial: The applicant demanded 3 counts of information. CPIO denied information with regard to item no.1 i.e. certified copy of Caste certificate submitted by Mr.Xyz at the time of appointment, under the plea that the information is personal in nature and shall invade privacy of the employee concerned. This contention is totally wrong. PIO failed to cogently arrive at a conclusion as how the document submitted in response to recruitment notice, which culminated into appointment of the employee, is personal information. Decision of PIO is malafide and not supported by reasoning.

Grounds of appeal

In case of No response: The total time available for PIO to supply information is 30 days in terms of Section-7(1) read with s.7(3)(a) of the Act. However, the PIO neither communicated his decision on my RTI Application nor supplied information within stipulated time limit of 30 days. No response on the part of PIO is a deemed denial of information in terms of S.7(2) of RTI Act, 2005.

OR

In case of exorbitant Fee: What I have sought from the SPIO is the list of persons enlisted under Section-79 A/B of KLR Act from 2010 to 2013. Such an information is required to be maintained by the Public Authority in compliance of the Land Reforms Act. Therefore the list showing information in 3 counts was required to be offered by SPIO. Instead, he made an unreasonable and illegal demand of Application Fee and further fee with malafide intention to discourage the Applicant from obtaining the information from your Public Authority. SPIO treated each person listed under Sec-79 A/B of KLR Act as a case of separate RTI Application and demanded Application Fee of Rs.10/-. Subject matter of RTI application dt: …………. is only one and asked three counts of information on same subject. Therefore there is no question of treating each case falling under Section-79 A/B of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, as separate RTI Application. There is no basis for SPIO to demand Application Fee of Rs. 10/- for each of the 798 cases falling under Sec-79 A/B of KLR Act, which information is available and ready for supplying to the Applicant. SPIO has failed to give reasons for treating each of the 798 cases enlisted in KLR Act as a Separate RTI Application for demanding Application Fee of Rs.7980/-. As there is only one RTI Application seeking 3 counts of information on single subject, SPIO erred in asking applicant to remit Rs.7980 towards Application Fee. The ADDITIONAL application fee demanded by SPIO is illegal, unreasonable and with malafide intention to discourage this applicant from obtaining the information.

OR

In case of denial: The caste certificate was submitted by the employee to the recruitment authority, much before his employment in the public authority, which became part of his service record after appointment. Recruitment is a public activity, which involves participation and interest of large number of aspirants. Caste certificate in question is not a document created during the service period of the employee, and therefore not a matter between the employer and employee, but related to public activity of recruitment and hence provisions of Section-8(1)(j) is not attracted in claiming exemption. Exemption can be claimed under sec-8(1)(j) only with respect to those information which relates to personal information, the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest. However, in the present case, the disclosure has direct relationship to the recruitment which was and is a public activity and hence PIO erred in claiming exemption under Section-8(1)(j) purportedly considering that disclosure of Caste Certificate shall invade privacy of the employee. In view of this, the exemption claimed by PIO is wrong. The information sought is not qualified for any exemption. Therefore, caste certificate is required to be supplied to the appellant.

Free of charge: PIO failed to supply information within 30 days and hence the applicant is entitled to receive information free of charge in terms of Sec-7(6) of the Act.

Personal hearing: Applicant may be heard personally by this Appellate Authority before deciding the appeal.

Prayer

 

  1. direct SPIO to supply information as sought vide my RTI Application dt: …………………, free of cost, within a period of 10 days from the decision of this Appeal.
  2. in the eventuality of this Appellate Authority arriving at a decision other than what is stated above (1), the PIO be put to strict proof in terms of Section-19(5) of RTI Act, specifically that the demand of Rs.7890/- towards Application Fee and Rs. 4788 towards 798 pages of information is within the frame work of RTI Act, 2005 and the Rules framed thereunder and this Hon'ble Appellate Authority may further be pleased to record and supply to this Appellant in terms of Section-19(5) of the Act, such proof produced to the subjective satisfaction of this Appellate Authority, which cogently led this Appellate Authority to arrive at a decision other than ordering to supply information free-of-cost as mandated under Sec-19(5) r/w Sec-4(1)(d)of the Act.
  3. the present appeal be disposed off by this Hon'ble Appellate Authority within 30 days of its receipt as provided under Section-19(6) of the Act;

Sample downloads

 

  • 1st Appeal on the ground of no response i.e. deemed refusal1)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
amanjs
PLEASE HELP ME

 

Organisation- Haryana Co-operative sugar mills Ltd , Rohtak

 

Drafted an RTI on 12 April 2017 to the concerned SPIO and received no reply

 

As I know the internal organisation structure of the mills I know that the entire administration is corrupt and they are intentionally ignoring my RTI (Truly I have been in that office and seen it myself as I have a relative employee in the mills )

 

As the First Appellate Authority is the Managing director of the mills , I donot expect any reply from him too.

But being a law abiding citizen I am ready to follow the procedures by RTI Law/

But again i do not expect reply from MD as well.

Recently I have heard in case of no reply a citizen can directly approach CIC

 

So I request the esteemed forum members to help me in this case.

 

Please Guide me in this further matter

i) If i should approach the first appeleate authority kindly provide me with what to write and how|

ii) If i should approach CIC , then how to approach CIC haryana and what to write and how to follow up with it, if you can provide me the details , address it would be very very helpful...

 

 

 

I thank in advance to people addressiong my query and providing me a SOLUTION...

 

Mr. GLN Prasad Please Advise

Can i directly approach CIC

If yes then how

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Prasad GLN

The following is your query. If I remember well, you have posted this query in the past also and asking my advice once again confirms that .

 

i) If i should approach the first appeleate authority kindly provide me with what to write and how|

ii) If i should approach CIC , then how to approach CIC haryana and what to write and how to follow up with it, if you can provide me the details , address it would be very very helpful...

 

1)First search website and find out the FAA (I remember that they have not stated such details or that they do not have any website). Then if the appeal is with in time frame fixed under RTI Act, then file appeal in prescribed format with such fees if any. Be brief and simple to the point. Write a separate covering letter to PIO and ask him to assist the appellant by forwarding the appeal.

 

First Appeal dt.26th May,2017 under RTI Act.

Before : First Appellate Authority,Haryana Co-operative sugar mills Ltd , Rohtak

Appellant: Public Information Officer, Haryana Co-operative sugar mills Ltd , Rohtak

 

 

Grounds for Appeal: PIO has neither provided information nor denied information stating such exemptions under RTI Act, for RTI Application filed on 12th Apr,2017, within 30 days from receipt of application by PIO. Hence treating the information as deemed denial, this first Appeal.

 

PRAYER: Appellant prays for directing Public Information Officer for providing information as expeditiously as possible, free of cost.

 

Appellant.

 

NOTE: As information is the focus, applicant should always go for FAA, wait for 50 days for FAA response and then file second appeal to SIC under Sec.19 of RTI Act. It is true that applicant can file complaint against PIO under Sec.18 without going for appeal, but he is not qualified to get information and his prayers for penalty or recommendation for disciplinary action can only be considered by IC, and such chances are remote.

 

Further Guidance: As your problem is chronic, kindly meet Shri Harider Dhingra at Gurgaon, who is our member and you can easily find his address, by checking up Haryana SIC..Status of appeals...Decisions...........by typing his name, as decisions consist full address of Hon HD. He is most competent to directly talk to concerned ICs are mill authorities and can get a remedy in your case.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Answer this question...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Similar Content

    • Shrawan
      By Shrawan
      Central Information Commission


       

      Decision No.286/IC(A)/2006
      F. No.CIC/MA/A/2006/00453
       
      Dated, the 20th September, 2006


       

      Name of the Appellant : Sh. N. Anbarasan, APPLESOFT, #39,1st, Cross, 1st Main, Shivnagar, W.C. Road,Bangalore – 560 010.
      Name of the Public Authority: Indian Overseas Bank, Central Office, Customer Service Department, P.B.No.3765, 763, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002.
       
      DECISION
       
      Facts of the Case:
       

      The appellant had sought the following information from the CPIO of the Indian Overseas Bank:
      “Request/invitation for proposal/quotation, Quotations, Technical bid, Commercial bid submitted by various language software (like Hind isoftware, Tamil software etc.) suppliers related to supply of software to all the Head/corporate offices and sub-ordinate offices/branches.
      Purchase Order/Supply Order placed on various language software suppliers related to supply of software.
      Request/invitation for proposal/quotation, Quotations, Technical bid, Commercial bid submitted by various vendors/dealers related to purchase of computers like PC, Server, Thin client etc. to the Head/Corporate offices and sub-ordinate offices/branches. Minutes/proceedings of the various committees involved in the
      purchase of software/hardware.
      Delivery Challans, Bills/Invoice, orders passed to make the payment, letter of sanction etc. related to purchase of computers like PC, Server, Thin client etc. to the sub-ordinate offices/branches.”
      [*]In his reply, the CPIO informed that information sought is: “Exempted under Section 8(1)(d) of the Act as the information falls under “commercial confidence” and “Trade Secrets” which would harm the competitive position of the third parties and the larger public interest does not warrant such disclosure.”
      [*]The appellate authority has upheld the decision of the CPIO.

      Commission’s Decision
       

      In a recent decision of the Commission, the following was observed: (Decision No.216 dated 31st August 2006):
      “Transparency in functioning of public authorities is expected to be ensured through the exercise of right to know, so that a citizen can scrutinize the fairness and objectivity of every public action. This objective cannot be achieved unless the information that is created and generated by public bodies is disclosed in the form in which it exists with them.
      Therefore, an information is to be provided in the form in which it is sought, u/s 7(9) of the Act. And, if it does not exist in the form in which it is asked for and provided to the applicant, there is no way that proper scrutiny of public action could be made to determine any deviations from the established practices or accepted policies.”
      In view of this, the information sought relate to the public action with regard to the processes that have been followed in purchase of computers and other accessories. Such actions clearly fall under the public domain and therefore exemption claimed u/s 8(1)(d) is not justified.
      The CPIO is, therefore, directed to furnish the information sought within 15 working days from the issue of this decision. The appeal is accordingly disposed of.
       


      Sd/-
      (Prof. M.M. Ansari)
      Information Commissioner


    • Shrawan
      By Shrawan
      Central Information Commission



      Decision No.285/IC(A)/2006
      F. No.CIC/MA/A/2006/00653
       
      Dated, the 20th September, 2006



      Name of the Appellant : Sh. Pradipta Dutta, B-141 Chittaranjan Park, New Delhi – 110 019
      Name of the Public Authority: Directorate of Income Tax (Legal & Research) (DIT), 3rd floor, Drumshaped Building, I.P.Estate, New Delhi- 110 002. DECISION
       
      Facts of the Case:
      The appellant had sought certain information in the form of queries, whichhave been duly responded by the CPIO and the appellate authority as well. Hehas however filed an appeal before the Commission against the reply of theappellate authority and prayed that the CPIO of DIT (L&R) be directed to furnishinformation with respect to his following queries:
      “Kindly inform why ITOs have been posted at DIT (L&R) even though there is no corresponding post in the same pay-scale at ITJSection, CBDT. What functions are the ITOs expected to discharge at DIT (L&R)?
      Kindly inform why ITOs at DIT (L&R) are being forced, under threat of disciplinary action, to perform the functions of an Asstt.Commissioner without being paid officiating pay.”
      Commission’s Decision:
       
      In its oft-repeated decisions, the Commission has advised the informationseekers that they ought not seek the views and comments of the CPIO on the questions asked by them. Yet, in the garb of seeking information mainly for redressal of their grievances, applications from requesters are filed. The CPIO’s in turn, have also ventured to answer them. Thus, the information seekers as providers have erred in interpreting the definition of information.
      A CPIO of any public authority is not expected to create and generate a fresh, an information because it has been sought by an appellant. The appellant is, therefore, advised to specify the required information, which may be provided, if it exists, in the form in which it is sought by him.
      The information sought relate to duties and responsibilities of ITOs deployed at different locations and the salary or compensation paid to them.Under Section 4(1) of the Act, all the public authorities are required to disclose such information as above. Had it been done by the respondent, the CPIO could have informed the applicant about the source where from he could have obtained the information. The need for filing application for information and this appeal could have thus been avoided. In pursuance of the principle of maximum disclosure, as u/s 4(1) of the Act, the CPIO is directed to disseminate the information so that in future, such applications are minimized.
      The appeal is accordingly disposed of.

      Sd/-
      (Prof. M.M. Ansari)
      Information Commissioner
      Download the Decision from Download segment.


       

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use & Privacy Policy