Information Commissioner like Sri DP Sinha be asked for not exceeding his jurisdiction.

0 have signed. Let’s get to 500!

Ref: File No. CIC/OFBKO/C/2018/611573/SD in case of Mr. Varun Krishna vs. CPIO, Ordnance Factory Katni, Madhya Pradesh-483503.

  1. The information Commissioner while disposing off the complaint has acted as taking law of the land in his hands and has forgotten that he is there to deliver justice to the Citizens so that rights of citizens are respected and cherished.
  2. The present order of the Commission has put blame on the complainant for asking information for his personal gain. It is very painful to mention that the Information Commissioner has not substantiated his claim of making such decision without any valid ground nor has he made any enquiry for that.
  3. Following is his Decision: In the context of the aforesaid observations, Commission does not find it expedient to afford any further opportunity of hearing in the instant case as well similar cases of the Complainant that may be pending with the CommissionAs regards the merits of the instant case is concerned, Commission observes that the CPIO has erred in not providing specific information with respect to the action taken on the email referred in the RTI Application. In other words, CPIO was required to inform the Complainant regarding the action taken on the averred email instead of providing a response on the subject matter of the email after receiving the RTI Application. Nonetheless, Commission does not find any malafide intention on the part of the CPIO, rather it reflects on his gross non- application of mind. CPIO is hereby warned to remain careful in future. A copy of this order is also marked to the FAA with a direction to ensure that applicants are provided an opportunity of hearing before deciding First Appeals in future.”
  4. It is evident from the order that the Information Commissioner has taken decision not to afford any opportunity of hearing in the instant case and in similar pending cases with the Commission. The present order/decision of the Commission reflects the vindictive attitude of the Information Commissioner against the Complainant for the reason best known to him.

  5. The Information Commissioner(IC) has exceeded his jurisdiction while delivering such decisions. The present IC has been assigned to look after certain categories of cases. How can he take decision on behalf of the Commission to prevent any appellant or complainant to appear for hearing? Even he can not deny any appellant or complainant to appear before him in any of the cases.

  6. This order of the Commission is on the Public Domain and Mr. Varun Krishna has been singled out by the Information Commissioner( Mr. D.P.Sinha in this case) causing severe mental torture and harassment. The Information Commissioner has thus denied natural justice to the complainant and his right to information which he is entitled for.
  7. Not giving decision in favor of the complainant is his right as envisaged under the RTI Act, but he can not deny any citizen to present his case before the Commission. It is a great matter of concern for other RTI Applicants who are trying to expose corruption and malpractices of Public Servants.
  8. Such orders of the Commission are encouraging Public Servants to do of there own, as they know nothing is going to happen against them, so far RTI Act is concerned.


  1. It is therefore, prayed that necessary enquiry be ordered by your honor so that truth is exposed and common citizen is not subjected to mental torture and character assassination.
  2. It is also prayed that Information Commissioner like Sri D.P. Sinha should be asked for not exceeding his jurisdiction.