• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

TAMILNADU INFORMATION COMMISSION No.2, Thiyagaraya Road, Teynampet, Chennai 600 018. Tel: 24357580 DATE OF ORDER – 25.09.2014 PRESENT Thiru S.F. AKBAR, B.Sc., B.L., STATE INFORMATION COMMISSIONER Case No. 30843/Enquiry/A/2013 Thiru B.Muthuraj, New No.7, Old No.1, .. APPELLANT Third Avenue, Ashok Nagar, Chennai-600 083. The Public Information Officer/ .. PUBLIC AUTHORITY Assistant Commissioner-1, Office of the Revenue Administration, Disaster Management and Mitigation Department, Chepauk, Chennai-5. ---- ORDER The appellant Thiru B.Muthuraj is absent. The Public Authority is represented by Tmt.P.Saradha, Assistant Commissioner-1, Office of the Revenue Administration, Disaster Management and Mitigation Department, Chepauk, Chennai-5. 2. The appellant is asking for a copy of the final orders passed in file No.O.P.1 (1)/54756/03 in his petition dated 15.04.2013 filed under Section 6(1) of the RTI Act, 2005. The Public Information Officer who is the Assistant Commissioner-1, Office of the Revenue Administration has not furnished any information within the statutory period of thirty days. Aggrieved by the inaction of the PIO, the appellant has preferred a First Appeal dated 17.05.2013 under Section 19(1) of the RTI Act, 2005 followed by this Second Appeal under Section 19(3) of the RTI Act, 2005 before this Commission on 03.07.2013 and the said appeal has been taken up for today's enquiry. 2 3. In the course of enquiry today, the PIO states that the information asked for by the appellant have been furnished by various letters dated 08.04.2013, 07.01.2014, 17.02.2014, 06.05.2014, 04.08.2014 and 16.09.2014. The appellant has not chosen to be present for today's enquiry and put forth his case and as such the inference should be that he is satisfied with the information. 4. The attention of the appellant is drawn to Rule-7 of the Tamil Nadu Information Commission (Appeal Procedure) Rules, 2012 which makes the personal attendance of the appellant mandatory and as such in the absence of the appellant; the appeal deserves to be only dismissed. In this case, the Appellant has not complied with the requirements of the said Rule. For this reason alone, the appeal is liable to be dismissed. However, in as much as, the PIO has turned up with the relevant records, the matter has been inquired into and the factum of furnishing of the required information to the appellant is recorded. Nothing more that remains to be considered in this appeal and accordingly this appeal is closed. Sd/- (S.F.AKBAR) STATE INFORMATION COMMISSIONER (BY ORDER OF THE COMMISSION) ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Case No. 30843/Enquiry/A/2013 To PUBLIC AUTHORITY : The Public Information Officer/ Assistant Commissioner-1, Office of the Revenue Administration, Disaster Management and Mitigation Department, Chepauk, Chennai-5. APPELLANT: Thiru B.Muthuraj, New No.7, Old No.1, Third Avenue, Ashok Nagar, Chennai- 600 083. *jb* .

Load more

  2

Copy Link