Central Information CommissionMrsuraj Lal Ravi vs South Eastern Coalfields Ltd. on 29 January, 2015CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                           ROOM NO. 329, SECOND FLOOR, C-WING
                            August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place,
                                       New Delhi-110066
                                    Tel. No. 91-11-26717356

                                                              F.No. CIC/SS/A/2013/001799-YA
                                                              F.No. CIC/SS/A/2013/001800-YA
                                                              F.No. CIC/SS/A/2013/001801-YA
                                                              F.No. CIC/SS/A/2013/001802-YA


Date of Hearing                               :    29.01.2015
Date of Decision                              :    29.01.2015
Appellant                                     :    Shri Suraj Lal Ravi
                                                   Surajpur, Chattisgarh

Respondent                                    :    Shri C.P. Singh, CPIO, SargujaShri Dharma Rao, CPIO, Bilaspur
                                                   South Easter Coalfeilds Limited
                                                   Chattisgarh

Information Commissioner                      :    Shri Yashovardhan Azad


Relevant facts emerging from appeal:RTI application filed on                      :    28.09.2012, 18.09.2012, 28.09.2012
PIO replied on                                :    No reply
First Appeal filed on                         :    28.12.2012
First Appellate Authority (FAA) order on      :    18.05.2013
Second Appeal received on                     :    27.06.2013


The appellant is not present. As both the parties are same in the above mentioned appeals, the
same are being clubbed and heard & decided together.F.No. CIC/SS/A/2013/001799-YA
                                  F.No. CIC/SS/A/2013/001800-YA

These appeals have identical RTI applications, thus, these are being clubbed together.The appellant sought information regarding proposal/MB raised by staff office (safety) from
the period of 01.01.2008 to 28.09.2012. On not receiving any reply from the PIO within the
prescribed time, the appellant filed first appeal. The FAA in his order directed the CPIO to
provide information to the appellant within 15 days.The respondent stated that he has provided information to the appellant on 19.01.2015
consisting of 264 pages, free of cost. He stated that as the prescribed period had already lapsed,
the information was provided to the appellant, free of cost. On query by the Commission as to
why there was a delay in providing the information to the appellant, the respondent stated that
the erstwhile PIO, Shri Awdhesh Kumar, passed away in a road accident in the month of April
 2014 and that he was appointed as PIO in August 2014. He stated that there was no formal
handing/taking over of files.F.No. CIC/SS/A/2013/001801-YA

The appellant filed an RTI application seeking information regarding all the purchase orders of
material required for safety items from two manufacturers from the period of 01.01.2008 to
28.09.2012. On not receiving any reply from the PIO within the prescribed time, the appellant
filed first appeal. The FAA in his order directed the CPIO to provide information to the
appellant within 15 days.The respondent stated that 54 pages have been provided to the appellant as information.F.No. CIC/SS/A/2013/001802-YA

The appellant filed an RTI application seeking information regarding purchase/supply orders of
two firms from the period of 01.01.2008 to 28.09.2012. On not receiving any reply from the
PIO within the prescribed time, the appellant filed first appeal. The FAA in his order directed
the CPIO to provide information to the appellant within 15 days.

The respondent stated that 90 pages have been provided to the appellant as information.

Decision:After hearing the respondent and on perusal of record, the Commission finds that information
has been provided to the appellant. As for the delay, the Commission accepts the respondents
plea. Moreover, the appellant is not present before the Commission to canvass his case, thus,
no further action is required in these cases.The appeals are disposed of accordingly.(Yashovardhan Azad)
                                                                  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 Commission.(B.D. Harit)
                                                      Deputy Secretary & Deputy Registrar