Commission orders release of information under RTI Act, emphasizing transparency and accountability.

The Central Information Commission allowed the Second Appeal, directing the respondents to provide the requested information within 30 days. The decision emphasized the importance of transparency and accountability under the RTI Act, 2005, stating that the Appellant had been deprived of the Act's benefits. The Commission held that the plea under Section 24 of the Act was not applicable, and the information sought did not impede an ongoing investigation.

---

---

Issues:
1. Denial of information under RTI Act, 2005 by CPIO.
2. Upholding of CPIO's decision by FAA.
3. Second Appeal before the Central Information Commission.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Denial of information under RTI Act, 2005 by CPIO
The Appellant filed an RTI application seeking specific information related to written submissions, Vakalatnama, and case laws submitted by a party mentioned in a particular order. The CPIO denied the information citing Section 24 of the RTI Act, 2005. The Appellant, feeling aggrieved by the response, filed a First Appeal (FA) as the desired information was not provided.

Issue 2: Upholding of CPIO's decision by FAA
The First Appellate Authority (FAA) upheld the decision of the CPIO, thereby denying the information sought by the Appellant. The FAA rejected the FA on the grounds that the case had not been finally adjudicated and the information could be related to an ongoing investigation, invoking Sections 8(l)(d), (h), and (j) of the RTI Act, 2005.

Issue 3: Second Appeal before the Central Information Commission
During the Second Appeal, the Appellant's advocate argued that the information sought did not impede the ongoing investigation by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) but pertained to documents submitted during adjudication proceedings. It was clarified that the documents were not part of the DRI investigation but were submitted by a co-noticee during the adjudication process. The Commission found that the plea taken under Section 24 of the RTI Act, 2005 was not applicable in this case.

The Commission thoroughly reviewed the case file, including the RTI application, responses, and appeal submissions. It concluded that the Appellant had been deliberately deprived of the benefits of the RTI Act, 2005 by the respondents. The Commission held that the Second Appeal deserved to be allowed entirely, directing the respondents to provide the requested information within 30 days.

In summary, the Central Information Commission allowed the Second Appeal, emphasizing the importance of upholding the principles of transparency and accountability enshrined in the RTI Act, 2005. The decision highlighted the need for public authorities to adhere to the provisions of the Act and provide information to citizens in a timely and transparent manner.

---