news details |
|
|
| SIC disposes off case for continued absence of appellant | | | Early Times Report
Srinagar, Dec 2: As an RTI appellant continuously remained absent before State Information Commission (SIC) during his appeal hearings , SIC taking the matter seriously disposed off the case without issuing any orders. As reported already there are many appellants who file appeal against PIOs in Information Commission and then fail to pursue the cases. It is alleged that in some cases the RTI appellants either get undue benefit from the Govt officials or are under pressure not to follow up the case .
Details available with Early Times reveal that one Muhammad Yousuf Mir R/O Lolab Kupwara on 8.03.2018 filed an RTI application before the Public Information Officer (PIO)/Block development Officer, Kupwara seeking information on five points relating to details of all the IAY cases distributed since 2011, details of all the works executed since 2011 with all necessary documents of 14th FC, 13th FC, CD Pyt, MGNREGA, BRGF, CDF, BADP and SBM.
The appellant submitted in the 2nd appeal before SIC that neither the PIO furnished any information to him in response to his RTI application dated 08-03-2018 nor the first appeal filed by him before the ACD Kupwara (FAA) was ever heard or decided compelling him to file the 2nd appeal.
The appeal came up for hearing before the State Information Commission (SIC) on 14-09-2018. The appellant was not present. ACD Kupwara (FAA) and the PIO (BDO Kupwara) were also not present during the hearing. However, Tufail Ahmad Pandit, Programme Officer, Block Wavoora represented the PIO during the hearing. The representative of the PIO furnished a communication dated 04-09-2018 wherein information has been furnished to the appellant. He also furnished receipt signed by the appellant acknowledging the receipt of information. However, due to absence of the appellant during the hearing, SIC could not verify whether he had actually received the information and signed the said receipt. The hearing was accordingly adjourned with a direction to the appellant to attend the Commission on the next date of hearing and also file his rejoinder to the information, if any, furnished to him by the PIO. The PIO (BDO Kupwara) was also directed to attend the next hearing personally.
SIC order held the appellant has also not filed any rejoinder to the information furnished to him. The continued absence of the appellant on consecutive hearings before the Commission indicate that he has either received the information and is satisfied with the same as claimed by the PIO or else he is not interested in pursuing the appeal any further before the Commission". |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
