Before The State Information Commission, Kerala
Punnen Road,Thiruvananthapuram-695 039.
Tel:0471 2335199, Fax:0471 2330920
Email: [email protected]
Present:
Shri.Palat Mohandas, Chief Information Commissioner
Shri.P.N.Vijayakumar, State Information Commissioner
Dr.P.T.Koshy
Thomas Clinic, Kozhinjampara.P.O,
Pin-678 555, Palakkad.
Appellant
Vs
1. Public Information Officer
Kozhinjampara Grama Panchayat,
Kozhinjampara.P.O,
Palakkad-678 555.
Respondents
2. Appellate Authority &
Deputy Director of Panchayat,
O/o.the Dy. Director of Panchayat,
Palakkad.
ORDER
The requester/appellant in this case is Dr.P.T.Koshy. On 22.4.2008, he
had preferred a request before the State Public Information Officer (SPIO),
Kozhinjampara Grama Panchayat, demanding certain items of information.
On 14.5.2008 itself the information was provided.
An appeal was
preferred by him alleging certain grounds, as incomplete and imperfect
information received by him.
The appeal was disposed off stating that the
information requested did not fall within the ambit of the RTI Act and, hence the
second appeal before the Commission.
The
question
that
arises
for
consideration
is
requester/appellant is entitled for the information requested?
whether
the
When
the
case
was
taken
up
for
hearing
on
4.2.2009,
the
requester/appellant Dr.P.T.Koshy was absent. No representation was received
from his side.
The SPIO and Secretary, Kozhinjampara Grama Panchayat
Shri.Swaminathan.V had appeared.
It was brought to the notice of the
Commission by filing an affidavit that what was requested was the details of the
license granted to one Mr.Mehraj for conducting some sort of business in the
Panchayat area.
All the information was provided by the then Secretary on
14.5.2008.
On going though the replies, it appeared to be satisfactory and
convincing.
There was no reason for the interference.
It was true that the
requester had made the request by putting question numbers in an ascending
order. The information furnished was not in the manner as requested by him.
The RTI Act provides provision for furnishing information but as not desired and
required by the requester.
Therefore, there is no reason for interference and hence the appeal is
dismissed.
Dated this the 5th day of February, 2009.
Sd/Palat Mohandas
Chief Information Commissioner
Sd/P.N.Vijayakumar,
State Information Commissioner
Authenticated copy
Secretary (In-charge)
jk
2
3