Complaint Case No. CC/206/2011 |
| | 1. P. Venkateswara Rao | Deputy Executive Engineer A.P. Vaidya Vidhana Parishad, Deputation to APMSIDC, KAKINADA, E.G. DIST Residential Address of Flat No.305, NBR, Extn.Aparatments, MEERPET, R.R. Dist Hyd | Hyderabad-79 | Telangana |
| ...........Complainant(s) | |
Versus | 1. Public information officer | O/o Dist Coordinator of Hospital Services, A.P. Vidya Vidhana Parishad, Old Mental Hospital, China Waltair, | Visakhapatnam | Andhrapradesh | 2. Dist Coordinator of Hospital Services | A.P. Vaidya Vidhana Parishad, Old Mental Hospital, China Waltair, | Visakhapatnam | Andhrapradesh |
| ............Opp.Party(s) |
|
|
ORDER | This case coming on 18-07-2014 before this Forum in the presence of Sri W.V.SIVARAMA PRASAD, Advocate for the Complainant, and of GOVERNMENT PLEADER represented by State of A.P. for the Opposite Parties, having stood over till this day for consideration, the Forum made the following: O R D E R (As per the Honourable President (FAC) on behalf of the Bench) - The case of the complainant in brief is that the complainant had applied a letter on 18-10-210 through speed post to the Public Information Officer C/o District Coordinator of Hospital Services, Anakapalle U/s 6(1) of Right to Information Act 2005, requesting to provide the following information by paying an amount of Rs.10/-: 1) Attested copies of transfer order of Sri Sivaji Rao, the then Assist. Executive Engineer (Deputation from P.R.Dept), O/o D.C.H.S., Anakapalle (APVVP) to P.R.Dept (Parent Dept), 2) Attested copies of charge list of Sri Sivaji Rao, the then Assistant executive Engineer O/o DCHS, APVVP, Anapalle, Visakhapatnam Dist. When he was transferred to P.R.Dept. (Charge list handed over to Sri.K.Sitarama Raju, Dy.E.E., APVVP, Eluru during 2006), 3) Attested copies of Attendance register of April and May Sri Sivaji Rao, A.E.E., APVVP, Anakapalle, Visakhapatnam Dist and 4) Attested Copies of list of out going calls (call sheets) of Sri Sivaji Rao, the then A.E.E.., O/o DCHS, Anakapalle since Jan 2006 to till he relieved from APVVP, Anakapalle, Visakhapatnam Dist.
- After receipt of his letter, PRO had sent a letter dated 5-12-2010 which was received by him on 28-12-2010 stating that the information will be provided within due course as the office was shifted to Visakhapatnam from Anakapalle but the information has not provided till the date. Then, the complainant applied First Appeal before the Appellate Authority on 17-1-2011 through speed post U/s 19 (1) RTI Act 2005, requesting to provide the required information as the Public Information Officer has failed to provide the information, even though, he paid required money. Even after 6 months, the information did not provide by the Appellate Authority. Hence, this complaint.
To pass an order to provide the complete information which I asked and to pay compensation of Rs.4.5 Lakhs towards my irrepairable loss, mental agony, abnormal delay in providing information and expenditure. - OP strongly resisted the claim of the complainant by filing its counter.
- Both parties filed affidavits as well as written arguments. Exhibits A1 to A5 are Suomoto marked. Heard the Opposite Party. But the forum does not look into the documents as the complaint is not maintainable in this Forum.
- As per the observation given by the Honourable National Commission, at the outset, it is not in dispute that the complainant has filed an application U/s 6 and 19 of RTI Act. The complainant cannot be considered as a Consumer defined under Consumer Protection Act. It is a settled law that this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain any petition under RTI Act as in RP No.4061/2010 held by the Honourable National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi in the case of T.Pundarika Vs. Revenue Department,(Service Division) Government of Karnataka wherein it held that the complainant did not come under the purview of Consumer Protection Act and he cannot claim as to be a Consumer; as there is a remedy available for him to approach the Appellate Authorities u/s 19 of RTI Act 2005, Hence, the complainant cannot entitle to any reliefs under Consumer Protection Act; he has to approach the proper authority for his grievance.
- In the result, this complaint is dismissed. No Costs.
Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by us in the open Forum, on this the 3rd day of July, 2014. Sd/- Sd/- Male Member President LIST OF DOCUMENTS For the Complainant: SL.Nos. | Date | Description of the document | Remarks | Ex-A1 | 18-10-2010 | Application addressed to Public Information Officer | Photocopy | Ex-A2 | 05-12-2010 | Letter sent by the OP | Original | Ex-A3 | | First appeal copy to the Appellate Authority Letter Addressed by the Complainant to the 1st OP | Photocopy | Ex-A4 | 19-10-2010 | Counter foil of IPO | Original |
For the Opposite Party :- -nil- Sd/- Sd/- Male Member President | |