State Information Commission, Punjab: Sco No. 84-85, Sector 17-C, Chandigarh

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO NO. 84-85, SECTOR 17-C, CHANDIGARH

Visit us @ www.infocommpunjab.com
Sh.Ajaib Singh,
S/o Bhinder Singh,
R/o Village Bishanpura, P.. Rajewas,
!ehsil Samana, "istrict Patiala. #$omplainant
Versus
Public %nformation fficer
/o Panjabi &ni'ersit(,
Patiala.
# Respondent
COMPLAINT CASE NO.364 /!13
Present) *one on behalf of $omplainant
Sh. Vi+rant Sharma, Ad'ocate $ounsel for the Respondent ,-./0/1233/34
ORDER
!he $omplainant is absent toda( but he has sent intimation that he would not be
able to appear toda( and has sought adjournment. Accordingl( the case shall come
upon 5.4.!13 "# 1!.3! AM.
Sd/1
$S"#%&'() P"* S%&+,-
5arch /3, 62/7. State %nformation $ommissioner
Sh.Surinder 8umar Bajaj
S/o Sh. 9arish 8umar $hhabra,
Street no./, :obind *agari near 5.S. 8a+ar,
5alout, "istrict 5u+atsar. #$omplainant
Versus
Public %nformation fficer
/o "irector,
Punjab State ;and "e'elopment < =inancial $orporation
S$ *o. /2/1/27, Sector /> $,
$handigarh. # Respondent
COMPLAINT CASE NO.4! /!13
Present) 5s. S. $handra, Ad'ocate counsel for the $omplainant
5r. R.;. ;uthra, Ad'ocate, counsel for the Respondent.
ORDER
n behalf of the $omplainant 5s. S. $handra, Ad'ocate is appearing. =or the
Respondent Sh. R.;. ;uthra, Ad'ocate is appearing. !he ld. $ounsel for the
Respondent has stated that he needs some time to pro'ide the information which is
a'ailable with him. %n 'iew of the re?uest of the counsel for the Respondent the case is
adjourned to //.0.62/7.
!o come up on 11.4.!13 "# 1!.3! AM.
Sd/1
$S"#%&'() P"* S%&+,-
Sh.Prem 8umar Rattan,
9ouse *o. >./., Par+ road,
*ew 5andi "huri #Appellant
Versus
/. Public %nformation fficer
/o =inancial $ommissioner $ooperation
Punjab 5ini Secretariat,
$handigarh.
6. =irst Appellate Authorit(
$handigarh. # Respondents
APPEAL CASE NO.17/!13
Present) Sh.Prem 8umar Rattan, $omplainant in person ,-.>666227-4
Sh. 8ulwant Singh Superintendent ,-.>6.//6034
ORDER
RTI A..*%/"#%0& 1%*(' 0& 2 6@.@.62/6
PIO R(.*%(' 2 /7.>.62/6
F%)3# A..("* F%*(' 2 ../2.62/6
S(/0&' A..("* R(/(%4(' 2 -./.62/7
%& S#"#( I&10)5"#%0& C055%33%0& 0&
I&10)5"#%0& S06+,# )
R(+")'%&+ R6*(3 6&'() 7,%/, #,( ACR %3 )(/055(&'('/"..)04('.
G)06&'3 10) C05.*"%&#/A..("* ) *o information was supplied
$ont. Page16
161
R(*(4"&# F"/#3 E5()+%&+ '6)%&+ 2
H(")%&+
!he respondent has stated that the A$R is written b( different officers +eeping in
'iew the wor+ of concerned officials, !he "eput( $ommissioner just gi'es his opinion in
the A$R form of the concerned officials wor+ing in his "istrict. 9"/ %ncharge of the
"epartment then writes his A$R, then the A$R1 goes to =$1 $ooperati'e.
!he Respondent has also stated in his repl( to the point *o.6 raised b( the
Appellant that there are no noting portions in which this specific A$R was attached in
the record. !he A$R form itself is sent directl( to different high officials, from the 9" to
=$1$ooperati'e in the "epartment. *ow the case is /*03('.
DECISION )
!he case is, therefore, /*03(' "&' '%3.03(' 011.
Announced in open $ourt,
!he copies of order be sent to the parties.
Sd/1
$S"#%&'() P"* S%&+,-
Versus
$handigarh.
$handigarh. # Respondents
APPEAL CASE NO.173 /!13
P)(3(&# 2 Sh.Prem 8umar Rattan, $omplainant in person
Sh. 8ulwant Singh Superintendent
ORDER
RTI A..*%/"#%0& 1%*(' 0& 2 6....62/6
PIO R(.*%(' 2 *il
F%)3# A..("* F%*(' 2 ../2.62/6
S(/0&' A..("* R(/(%4(' 2 -./.62/7
%& S#"#( I&10)5"#%0& C055%33%0& 0&
I&10)5"#%0& S06+,# )
R(+")'%&+ R6*(3 01 P)050#%0&.
G)06&'3 10) C05.*"%&#/A..("* ) *o information was supplied
C0&#. P"+(-
--
APPEAL CASE NO.173 /!13
R(*(4"&# F"/#3 E5()+%&+ '6)%&+ 2
H(")%&+
"uring the course of discussion it has transpired that the Appellant wants to
+now that in the case of Sh. Baljinder Singh $hief Auditor who lateron became
Additional $hief Auditor of Audit Aing, while writing his A$R who were the three
authorities i.e. Reporting , Re'iewing and Accepting. !he Respondent has stated that in
this case, reporting authorit( was 9", while re'iewing and accepting authorit( was
=$1$ooperati'e who acted as Re'iewing cum Accepting Authorit(.
Since the needful has been done the case is closed.
DECISION )
Sd/1
$S"#%&'() P"* S%&+,-
Versus
/. Public %nformation fficer,
/o "irector, Vigilance Bureau, Punjab
S$ @21@/, Sector />1",
$handigarh.
/o "irector, Vigilance Bureau, Punjab
S$ @21@/, Sector />1",
$handigarh # Respondents
Present) Sh.Prem 8umar Rattan, Appellant in person
Sh. P.8. $hibber, "eput( "istrict Attorne(, /o Vigilance Bureau, Punjab
,-0/>2.33@74
ORDER2
RTI A..*%/"#%0& 1%*(' 0& 2 /0.0.62/6
PIO R(.*%(' 2 *il
F%)3# A..("* F%*(' 2 *il
C05.*"%&#/ S(/0&' A..("* R(/(%4(' 2 -./.62/7
%& S#"#( I&10)5"#%0& C055%33%0& 0&
I&10)5"#%0& S06+,# 2
D(/%3%0& #"8(& FC 9%3( %& #,( :(") !! #0 !11.
$ont. Page16
161
DECISION
G)06&'3 10) C05.*"%&#/A..("* 2 *o information was supplied
R(*(4"&# F"/#3 E5()+%&+ '6)%&+ 2
H(")%&+
"uring the $ourse of discussion that it has transpired that the re?uisite
information has alread( been sent b( the Respondent to the appellantBwhich the
Appellant has not recei'ed. !he Respondent was directed to suppl( a cop( of the repl(
alread( sent to the Appellant toda(. !he re?uisite documents ha'e been dul( handed
o'er to the Appellant in the $ourt itself. %n 'iew of the abo'e the case is /*03('.
DECISION )
Sd/1
$S"#%&'() P"* S%&+,-
Sh.Vi+as Bhardwaj,
A202, Ashiana :ardens, Bhiwadi,
Rajasthan172/2/- #Appellant
Versus
/o Panjab !echnical uni'ersit(,
8apurthala Road, Calandhar
/o Panjab !echnical uni'ersit(,
8apurthala Road, Calandhar # Respondents
Present) Sh.Vija( "himan, on behalf of $omplainant
5s. :eti+a Sood, ;egal fficer, P!&, ,-0>.2-.2034 for Respondent.
ORDER
n behalf of the Appellant, Sh.Vija( "himan is present alongwith authorit( letter.
"uring the course of discussion the Respondent has re?uested that the rele'ant record
is in the custod( of 5r. Ranjit Singh, $ontroller of DEamination ,Regular Branch4 P.!.&.,
Calandhar. !he Respondent has re?uested that alongwith her the P% /o $ontroller of
DEamination , P.!.&. Calandhar be also ordered to be present in the court on the neEt
date of hearing, so that the information being sought b( the Appellant can be pro'ided.
Accordingl( alongwith the Respondent who is present toda( the P% /o $ontroller of
DEamination, P.!.&. be present in the court on the neEt date of hearing.
!o come up on 11.4.!13 "# 1!.3! A.M.
Sd/1
$S"#%&'() P"* S%&+,-
$$) P% /o C0&#)0**() 01 E;"5%&"#%0&, P6&<"= T(/,&%/"* U&%4()3%#:, J"*"&',") ---
'%)(/#(' #0 =( .)(3(&# 0& #,( &(;# '"#( 01 ,(")%&+ %.(. 11.4.!13.
Sd/1
$S"#%&'() P"* S%&+,-
Sh.9.B.S. 9undal
F 7026, Sector >/,
5ohali ,Pb4 #Appellant
Versus
/o "5, 5andi Board,
5oga
/o "5, 5andi Board,
5oga. # Respondents
APPEAL CASE NO.16>6/!1
Present ) Sh.9.B.S. 9undal, $omplainant in person ,-.>.3222.64
Sh. Surinder Pal Singh, Gen, ,-./301@7-7-4 <
Sh.:urmeet Singh, S" ,--..0136>224 <
Sh.Vija( !i+oo, Senior Account fficer,,-.>@/.602-4 on behalf of Respondent
ORDER
n the last date of hearing the Appellant had been directed to 'isit the office of
the concerned Respondent so as to loo+ into the recordBthe photocopies of which
were to be pro'ided to him under R!% Act, 6223. !oda( the Respondent has produced
the intimation which has been sent to the Appellant on ..7.62/7 re?uiring him to deposit
the amount of Rs./,32,2>2 for >.,032 pages. !he Respondent a'erred that earlier, in
response to the original R!% application dated 6/.6.62/6 the Respondent had sent him
the repl( on 3.7.62/6 and @.7.62/6, stating that he should 'isit the office of the
Respondent because the information being sought b( him was not specific. !he
Appellant states that he has not recei'ed the letter dated @.7.62/6 which was un1
registered, although, the Respondent pointed out that if he had recei'ed the earlier
$ont. Page16
161
APPEAL CASE NO.1696/2012
letter, then wh( not this. % shall not go into whether the letter was recei'ed or not b( the
Appellant. !he Respondent is supposed to intimate to the Appellant within /2 da(s of
the receipt of his application as to how much fee is re?uired to be deposited and at what
rate alongwith number of copies. !he Respondents ha'e erred in this matter. Also if
certain information was not being dealt with b( the Respondent, then the concerned
point of the information should ha'e been transferred to the dealing department within 3
da(s of the receipt of the application. !his was not done and the mista+e has occurred it
seems bonafide, being not aware of the eEact pro'ision of the R!% Act. 9owe'er,
+eeping the pro'ision of the R!% Act, 6223, in 'iew the raising of the demand of
Rs./,32,2>2/1 for fee of copies raised on @.7.62/7 cannot be demanded b( the
Respondents from the Appellant. !he Respondents are directed to suppl( the
information before neEt date of hearing free of cost.
!o come up on 11.4.!13 "# 1!.3! AM.
Sd/1
$S"#%&'() P"* S%&+,-

State Information Commission, Punjab: Sco No. 84-85, Sector 17-C, Chandigarh

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

State Information Commission, Punjab: Sco No. 84-85, Sector 17-C, Chandigarh

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB

SCO NO. 84-85, SECTOR 17-C, CHANDIGARH

You might also like