Você está na página 1de 3

Central Information Commission, New Delhi

File No.CIC/WB/C/2010/000133-SM
Right to Information Act-2005-Under Section (19)
Date of hearing
Date of decision
29 November 2011
29 November 2011
Name of the Appellant : Shri Anand Moudgil,
B-1-1116, Dr. Bindraban Street,
Civil Lines,
Ludhiana 141 001.
Name of the Public Authority : CPIO, Staff Selection Commission,
Department of Personnel & Training,
Block No. 12, Kendriya Karyalaya Parisar,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi 110 003.
CPIO, Ministry of Road Tpt & Highways,
Room No. 531, Transport Bhawan,
1, Parliament Street, New Delhi 110 001.
CPIO, Ministry of Law & Justice,
Legislative Department,
Room No. 725, A Wing,
Floor, Shastri Bhawan,
New Delhi 110 001.
The Appellant was not present in spite of notice.
On behalf of the Respondent, the following were present:-
(i) Shri A.K. Singh, Director & CPIO, Rajya Sabha Sectt.
(ii) Shri Shashi Bhushan, Joint Director, Rajya Sabha Sectt.
(iii) Shri Prem Singh, Dy. Director, Rajya Sabha Sectt.
(iv) Shri Dharkat R. Luikang, Under Secretary
(v) Shri Jose Thomas, Deputy Secretary
Chief Information Commissioner : Shri Satyananda Mishra
2. This case was fixed for hearing today through videoconferencing. The
Complainant did not turn up in the Ludhiana studio of the NIC in spite of notice. The
Respondents representing the Rajya Sabha Secretariat, Ministry of Transport and
the Legislative Department were present in our chamber and made their
3. The Complainant had sought a number of information relating to the repeal
of the Motor Vehicles Act 1939 and some other related issues. The CPIO of the
Rajya Sabha Secretariat had provided some information against some of the
queries and had also transferred the remaining queries to the Ministry of Transport
and the Legislative Department. The CPIO of the Ministry of Transport, in a belated
reply, provided some information but also stated that the relevant records were not
traceable since the said Act had been repealed way back in 1988.
4. After carefully considering the facts of the case, we are not at all satisfied
with the response of the CPIO of the Ministry of Transport. It is most unlikely that
they should not have the relevant records relating to the repeal of the said Act and
the enactment of the new one in its place. Every Ministry of the Government
maintains such files and records very scrupulously since such records are resorted
to each time the law is to be amended. Therefore, we think that enough effort has
not been made to locate the records.
5. In the light of the above, we would like to direct the CPIO to bring this fact to
the notice of the Secretary to the Ministry and try and locate the relevant records. If
the records could be located, he must send to the Complainant the desired
information including the photocopies of the relevant records within 15 working days
of receiving this order. However, if, after a thorough search, the relevant records are
still not traceable, he shall inform the Complainant accordingly.
6. Regarding the delay in this case, the Respondent submitted that it was not
deliberate and was caused because the Ministry was seriously trying to locate the
records so as to be able to provide the desired information. Looking to the vintage
of the information sought, we would accept this explanation.
7. The complaint is disposed of accordingly.
8. Copies of this order be given free of cost to the parties.
(Satyananda Mishra)
Chief Information Commissioner
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
(Vijay Bhalla)
Deputy Registrar