KUNDAN KUMAR KUMAI

This is an appeal u/s 41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, preferred against the final order dated 18/08/2022 in CC/67/2021, passed by the Ld. DCDRC, Malda.

Brief fact of the Appellant’s case is that the Appellant had submitted one RTI application for obtaining information from the Respondent/Center after depositing the statutory court fees of Rs.10/-. But the Respondent/Center did not furnish any reply against the said RTI application. Finding no alternative, the Appellant filed a complaint before the Ld. DCDRC, Malda with necessary prayers.

The Respondent/Center did not appear to contest the claim and the matter was heard ex-parte.

After going through evidence on record, Ld. DCDRC, Malda passed the impugned order dismissing the complaint.

Being aggrieved by the impugned order the Appellant preferred the instant appeal on the ground, that the Ld. DCDRC, Malda, erred in law and facts while passing the impugned order.

                                                                 Decisions with Reasons

Ld. Advocate for the Appellant at the time of final hearing submitted that though the Respondent/Center did not comply with the statutory provisions of the RTI Act, 2005, the Ld. DCDRC had failed to entertain the complaint erroneously. He, therefore, prayed for allowing the appeal and setting aside the impugned order.

None appeared on behalf of the Respondent/Center and as such the case was heard ex-parte.

RTI Act, 2005 is a special enactment to provide information to the applicants and on receipt of each application, information has to be provided within 30 days as to the provision of Section 7(1) of the Right to Information Act, 2005. Section 19 (1) of the Right to Information Act, 2005, lays down the procedure when information sought u/s 7 (1) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 is not provided or being aggrieved, may prefer appeal within 30 days. In the instant case, the appellant filed an application and did not prefer an appeal when he did not receive any information as prayed, as laid down u/s 19(1) of the of the Right to Information Act, 2005. Under the circumstance, when the procedure on the failure of receipt of such information is codified under the provisions of the of the Right to Information Act, 2005, the Appellant’s failure to prefer an appeal bars the Appellant for being a consumer as deficiency of service is not established. Hence, the appeal is bound to fail as the Appellant’s case of deficiency of service does not stand established.

                                                                It is therefore,

                                                                 ORDERED

That the instant appeal be and the same is dismissed ex-parte, but without cost.

For the reasons laid down in the body of the judgement, the impugned order is hereby upheld. However, this order does not preclude the appellant from seeking the information, under the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005, again, provided the procedure mentioned in the above Act, is followed to its logical end, before filing an application under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act.

Copy of the order be sent to the parties free of cost.

Copy of the order be sent to the Ld. DCDRC, Malda for necessary information.