TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 1244X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reference has caused genuine detriment to the appellant inasmuch as he cannot tell the Bar that he has been exonerated of the allegations made against him by the Bangalore Bar Association. I am, therefore, not satisfied with the explanation given by the CPIO - penalty should be imposed on the CPIO - Decided in favour of appellant. - File No. CIC/SS/C/2013/000177/LS - - - Dated:- 18-7-2013 - Shri M.L. Sharma, J. Shri R.K. Jain, the Appellant. Shri Victor James, Director (Vig.), EDMC, for the Respondent. ORDER Heard today dated 18-7-2013. Appellant present. The Public Authority is represented by Shri Victor James, the then CPIO presently working as Director (V), EDMC. 2. A Coordinate Bench of the Commission vide order date ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... information sought in clause (A) to (E) . The CPIO vide letter No. R-20011/37/2011-Ad.IC dated 16-9-2011 replied to the appellant as follows : (A) A copy of the enquiry report was received in this Department on 25-8-2011; (C) The documents required for examination of the report are being gathered; (E) No other communication has been received or sent with reference to the above mentioned Enquiry Committee Report; (F) No such report has been received in the Department; and (B, D G) A copy of the notice issued to CESTAT u/s 11(1) of the RTI Act is enclosed. Thereafter the CPIO vide letter dated 4-10-2012 informed the appellant that CESTAT has objected to the disclosure of the document referred to in the RTI application. A copy of CESTAT s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... exist in the eye of law. As soon as the fresh report is ready, it can be furnished to the appellant. From this, it is construed that the process of enquiry has not been concluded and therefore, disclosure of information at this stage stands exempted under the provisions of Section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act. Therefore, the decision of the CPIO for non-disclosure of information sustainable u/s 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act and the instant appeal stands disallowed. 4. In his second appeal filed before the Commission, the appellant states that the FAA has illegally and malafidely taken an ex parte decision on the third party objection of the CESTAT inspite of the appellant having requested for a copy of the CESTAT s reply and an opportunity to place ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... letter under which the report is received and name and designation of the Officer signing it has not been provided. The CPIO has provided incomplete information with regard to the clause (C) of the RTI application in question. He merely stated that documents required for examination of the report are being gathered. This information is provided on 16-9-2011 after the receipt of the letter dated 18-8-2011 of the Registrar, CESTAT, wherein in the third para, the Registrar has clearly stated the President, CESTAT vide his order dated 12-8-2011 has rejected the report and a new Committee comprising of Hon ble Shri P.G. Chacko has been constituted. The FAA erred in not appreciating that the CESTAT in its reply dated 29-9-2011 has nowhere objecte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ut, however, giving reasons as to how the information if disclosed would impede the process of investigation/enquiry or apprehension or prosecution of offenders. 7. In view of the above, the Commission hereby directs the CPIO to provide complete information, as per record to the appellant as requested in his RTI application, free of cost within ten days of receipt of this order. 8. The Commission is of the view that Shri Victor James, the then CPIO/Under Secretary, has prima facie provided misleading information to the appellant, at Clause (f) of his reply dated 16-9-2011 that no such report of the Enquiry Committee headed by Dr. C. Satapathy has been received in the Department of Revenue, whereas Registrar, CESTAT by his letter dated 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CPIO s contention that there was confusion in his mind is nothing but an after thought to cover up his deliberate and intentional obfuscatory action. 7. On the direction of the Commission, Shri Jain produces the enquiry report before the Commission which is perused. It is the appellant s contention that certain allegations had been made against him by the Bangalore Bar Association which were enquired into by a two Member Committee of CESTAT. The Committee had fully exonerated him and rather commended his role in helping the new administration of CESTAT to improve its functioning. Non-supply of the copy of the report in real time caused him real detriment in that in the absence of the report, he could not establish his credentials at the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
