CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
(Room No.315, B­Wing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi 110 066)

File No.CIC/SA/A/2014/000556
CIC/SA/A/2014/000773
CIC/SA/A/2014/000774
CIC/SA/A/2014/000775
CIC/SA/A/2014/000354
CIC/SA/A/2014/000353
CIC/SA/A/2014/001548
CIC/SA/A/2014/001549
CIC/SA/A/2014/001916
CIC/SA/A/2014/001911
CIC/SA/A/2014/001298
CIC/SA/A/2014/001612
CIC/SA/A/2014/001294

  
 
Appellant  : Vijay Kumar Garg and 

Kuldeep Singh Yadav

Respondent : Food & Supply Dept  GNCTD

Date of hearing : 18­12­2014 & 6.1.2015

Date of decision :

  Information Commissioner : Prof. M. Sridhar Acharyulu
(Madabhushi Sridhar)

Page 1
 Referred Sections : Sections 19(3) of the RTI Act

Result : Appeal  disposed of 

Observation : A case of Misuse of RTI

1. The appellant is not present. The Public Authority is represented by Ravinder 

Kaur, FSO.   , T. N Meena, Suman Vid(FSO), Arun Tandon, Narender tank (FSO), R K 

Anand. FSO.

2. All the above stated appeals have been clubbed together, as the subject matter of all the 

appeals are more or less same. 

FACT:

       
     CIC/SA/A/2014/000556

3. Appellant through his RTI application dt 3.1.2014 is seeking information with respect to 

FPS,   through   6   points.   CPIO   replied   on   24.1.2014   giving   point   wise   reply.     Being 

unsatisfied, appellant filed first appeal. FAA in his order dated 11.3.2014 disposed  of the 

appeal stating that the requisite informaiton has already been supplied to the appellant 

vide communication  dated  24­1­2014.   Being unsatisfied  with  the  FAA  order, appellant 

made second appeal before the Commission. 

 
CIC/SA/A/2014/000773

4. Appellant through his RTI application dated 23.1.2014 is seeking information with respect 

FPS situated in mandal no. 18 through 6 points. CPIO on 13.2.2014 provide point wise 

reply.   Being   unsatisfied   with   the   CPIO   reply,   the   appellant   made   first   appeal   on 

Page 2
 18.3.2014.FAA   vide   order   dt   17.4.2014   directed   the   CPIO/Assistant   Commissioner   to 

provide   information   within   15   days.   On   non   compliance   of   FAA   order,   the   appellant 

approached the Commission in second appeal.

CIC/SA/A/2014/000774

5. Appellant through his RTI application dt 13.1.2014 is seeking information with respect FPS 

of mandal no 58 through 5 points. CPIO requested the appellant to deposit Rs 5260/­ for 

obtaining   the   copies.   Being   unsatisfied   with   the   CPIO   reply,   the   appellant   made   first 

appeal on 26.2.2014.FAA by his order dated 16.4.2014 upheld the reply of PIO. Being 

unsatisfied   with   the   FAA   order,   the   appellant   approached   the   Commission   in   second 

appeal.

CIC/SA/A/2014/000775

6. Appellant   through   his   RTI   application   dated   24.2.2014   sought   to   know   about   the 

compliance of RTI act by the FAA & PIO through 7 points. CPIO on 3.4.2014 gave point 

wise   reply.   Unsatisfied   with   the   PIO   reply,   the   appellant   made   first   appeal   on 

28.3.2014.FAA on 22.4.2014 ordered that case already been decided on 7.2.2014 and was 

complied off by the PIO as the appellant is claiming non receipt of information he may 

approach   Central   information   Commission.   Being   unsatisfied   with   the   FAA   order,   the 

appellant approached the Commission in second appeal.

Proceding Before The Commission:

7. The respondent officer submitted that the appellant Mr. Kuldeep Singh Yadav is proxy for 

Mr. Vijay Kumar Garg, as both file the photostat copies of handwritten RTI application for 

Page 3
 same or similar information from same or different offices.  Opportunity of inspection was 

also given to them in some cases but they never turned up

8.  The Commisison finds the appellant Mr. Kuldeep Singh Yadav to be an associate of Mr. 

Vijay Kumar Garg and as the covering letter to RTI application on comparision with the RTI 

letter in file No. CIC/SA/A/2014/000557/866 (which are heard today)  is in the same hand­

writing except the numbers.   The contact address is also same for both the appellants. 

This is an example that confirms suspicion that a scandal might be under operation by 

some people in  the  garb of   exercising  RTI applicants.    Taking  this  into  consideration 

takeup a breif sumary of all the previous cases decided by the Commission and deal with 

all the rest of the cases pending before the Commsision with respect to these Contangrous 

applicants.

Sumarry of cases decided by Commision of Apellant Vijay Kumar Garg.

S.  Case No Public Authority Information sought for  Commission Direction

No
1 CIC/AD/A/2013/001514­SA Department  In relation to Kerosene  Directed   the 

. Food   and  Free   Delhi   Scheme,  respondent   authority 

1 Supply, GNCTD Anna   Shree   yojna   &  to furnish information n 

action taken report on  with respect to Q no 5 

his letter to PGC of RTI application
2 CIC/AD/A/2014/000104­SA ­­do­­ ­­­ Appellant   submitted 

. CIC/AD/A/2014/000116­SA that he got info. On his 

CIC/AD/A/2014/000024­SA all   3   appeal.   Hence 

Commission   had 

closed the Appeal

Page 4
 3 CIC/AD/A/2014/000117­SA ­­do­­ In   relation   to   Food  Appellant   was   not 

. CIC/AD/A/2014/000198­SA Circle   No  17,   39,47   &  satisfied   with   the 

CIC/DS/C/2014/000593­SA 63, regarding detail of  information   furnished 

CIC/AD/C/2014/000023­SA ration   food   article,  and   requested   for 

kerosene   oil   supplied  Inspection.   In   view   of 

to various FPS. the above Commission 

directs the respondent 

authority   to   facilitate 

inspection. 

Note: Commission while hearing the above appeals had stated that information sought by the appellant 

was in public interest and by hearing the combined hearing the Commission had avoid the possibility of 

2000  more  RTI   application.   The  appellant   had  also  submitted  that   after   he  received  the  notice  of 

hearing from the CIC, he had met all the CPIOs of the concerned divisions and appealed to them to 

respond positively and he was happy that they have responded positively. The Commission notes the 

appreciation that most of the respondents recorded their appreciation for the appellant and said that he 

became their friend. The appellant also profusely thanked the respondents. The commission observes 

that the appellant has set a new trend in resolving information related disputes through co­ordination 

and friendly negotiations.

4. CIC/SA/A/2014/000366 Department   of  Details about the  Respondent   authorities   Dr 

Women   and   Child  Ladli   Yojna  Nisha   Aggarwal   on 

Development,  Branch   of   WCD  05.12.2014 had submitted an 

GNCTD namely,   Name,  application   stating   that 

address,   Phone  sufficient   information   had 

Page 5
 number of branch  been   furnished   and   also 

concerned   with  stated that the appellant had 

the   Ladli   Yojna  filed application in PGC also 

and   detail   of   the  on   the   same   issue   and   had 

worker there etc been   given   a   satisfactory 

reply.   She   further   cited 

instances   whereby   the 

appellant   had   been   found 

misusing   the   system   to   his 

own benefit.

After hearing both the parties, 

the   Commission   observed 

that   if   the   respondent 

authority   finds   any   prima 

facie   evidence   against   the 

appellant,   they   may   proceed 

as per the law. As far as the 

RTI   application   was 

concerned,   sufficient 

information   was   given   for 

Point   No.   1   &   2   and   the 

appellant   was   also   informed 

about the scheme.

Page 6
5. CIC/SA/A/2014/000557 Department   of  Information   was  The   respondent   officer 

& Women   and   Child  sought in relation  facilitated inspection of the 

CIC/SA/A/2014/000866 Development,  to   appellant 

seven   fair   price   shops   on 
GNCTD previous   RTI 
16­12­2014   to   the 
application   dated 
appellant.  He was told that 
16.12.2014.
the inspection of the seven 
And   in   the 
fair   price   shops   has   been 
second   Appeal, 
finished   by   the   appellant 
he   had   sought 

information   in  within   a   short   span   of   2 

relation   to   FPS  hours,   implying   thereby 

vacancy   in  that   he   has   not   done   any 

2013/14 inspection,   but   extracted 

the bribe money from each 

shop   and   acknowledged 

the   inspection.     He 

received   this   complaint 

from   one   of   the   FPS 

dealers   he   inspected. 

From   each   shop,   he 

collected   Rs.1,000/­   and 

acknowledged   the 

inspection.     Thereafter   he 

has withdrawn this appeal.

Page 7
 The   Commission   after 

hearing   (Appelant   was   not 

present)   the   respondent 

observed   tht   appellant   is 

misusing   the   RTI   Act   and 

directed   the   Pio   the   PIO   is 

directed   to   examin   in   depth 

the   purpose   for   which   the 

appellant   is   asking   RTI 

questions and if he finds any 

possibility   of   misusing,   he 

shall   not   answer   such 

questions   and   take 

appropriate action, keeping in 

mind   that   the   appellant 

misused RTI earlier by asking 

for   inspection   of   the   shops. 

The PIO has given his written 

submissions   in   this   regard. 

The   Commisison   directs   the 

PIO to paste this order in the 

office   premises/FPSs   and 

upload the same in their web 

site and give directions to the 

Page 8
 FPS   dealers   not   to   pay   any 

money   to   the   appellant   Mr. 

Vijay Kumar Garg.   

4.       The   Commission 

further   recommends 

that    in   view   of   the 

multiple   number   of   RTI 

applications   and   the 

possibility   of   misuse   of 

RTI   Act   as   reflected   in 

the cases of   Shri Vijay 

Kumar   Garg   and   his 

associates,   the 

Commission 

recommends   the   public 

authority to provide   the 

following information on 

the web­site:­

1. Total stock for 

each month released to 

the FPS dealer and 

month­wise details to 

each FPS

2. Shop­wise 

consumption and 

Page 9
 distribution of rations;

3. Complaints, if 

any against the FPS 

dealers and action 

taken on complaints.

The  above  details   shall 

be   placed   on   the   web­

site and updated   every 

month.     The   action 

taken information on the 

complaints shall also be 

updated.     This   would 

help the citizens to have 

information   without 

resorting   to   RTI 

applications.     The 

Commission   would   like 

to   remind   the   Public 

Authority   that   this   kind 

of  information is   to be 

placed   on   the   public 

domain   voluntarily   by 

the Public Authority,   as 

mandated   by   section 

4(1)(b) of the RTI Act.

Page 10
6. CIC/SA/A/2014/000983 Department   of  Appellant through  Respondent   submitted   that 
Social   Affair, 
his   RTI  the appellant in a letter dated 
GNCTD
application   had  02.05.2014   wrote   he   did   not 

sought   for  require   that   information 

information   in  anymore,   and   he   was 

relation   to   the  withdrawing   the   same. 

date   of  Respondent further submitted 

establishment   of  that the information sought by 

the office, Details  the appellant was all available 

of   DSWO   from  in   the   website   and   that   the 

the   date   of   its  appellant   was   only   in   the 

establishment,  habit   of   filing   repeated   RTI 

from   when   the  applications to harass them. 

Widow   Pension 

was started, from  The   Commission   noted 

when   the  appellant’s   numerous   RTI 

handicap pension  applications   on   the   same 

was started..etc subject matter, will not attend 

in first appeals and had taken 

almost   all   cases   to   the 

Commission   in   Second 

Appeal   or   Complaint.   This 

kind   of   attitude   of   the 

appellant has resulted in the 

loss   of   precious   time   of   the 

Public   authority   and   the 

Page 11
 Commission.

…...

Even though the Commission 

observes   that   this   is   a  clear 

case of misuse of RTI Act by 

the   appellant.   The 

Commission   takes   the 

opportunity   to   direct   the 

Public authority to put all the 

information   which   is   general 

in   nature   and   which   the 

department   has   to   provide 

Under   Sec   4   of   RTI   Act   in 

their website and a hard copy 

of the same be kept in their 

offices,   both   in   Hindi   and 

English.   In   response   to   the 

same,   the   respondent 

authority   submitted   that   the 

information   sought   by   the 

appellant   and   other   welfare 

schemes   of   the   department 

was already uploaded in their 

website.   The   best   way   of 

fighting   misuse   of   RTI   by 

Page 12
 persons such as appellant is 

to   put   all   organizational 

information,   welfare   scheme 

related details on the website 

under   Section   4   of   RTI   Act. 

Proper   transparency 

mechanisms   would   leave   no 

scope for touts. 

In   this   specific   case,   the 

Conduct   of   the   appellant   in 

giving letter dated 02.05.2014 

that the information sought by 

him   is   not   required   and 

thereafter   filing   Second 

Appeal   before   the 

Commission   clearly   shows 

that the main purpose of the 

appellant   is   harassing   the 

Public   authority   and   the 

Commission   and  directs   him 

to   pay   Rs   500   to   the 

Respondent   Authority,   which 

amount shall be used for RTI 

cell of the public authority. 

Page 13
 The Commission direct to the 

Public authority to publish in 

their   website   and   in   their 

notice   board   advising   the 

people not to fall prey to false 

promises of touts, not to pay 

any   money   to   them   or   any 

employee of the department.

The   Commission   directs   the 

Public   authority   to   place   the 

present order in their website 

and   circulate   the   same 

among their offices in Public 

interest, so that everyone will 

know about such kind of touts 

and mis­users of RTI Act
7.  CIC/SA/A/2014/000559 SDM(Elections),  Information   was  The   appellant   is   not 
GNCTD
sought   with  present.     The   respondent 

respect to AERO 
officers  submitted   that   the 
Office   in   AC­08 
information   sought   by   the 
viz   i)   details   of 
appellaant   has   already 
the 
been   furnished   to   the 
officials/employe
appellant.     The 
es   posted   in   the 
Commission having peruse 
AC­8   Office   ii) 
the   record,   finds   that 

Page 14
 details   of   the  sufficent   information   has 

officials   posted  been   furnished   to   the 

for   making   of 

appellant
Voter ID Card iii) 

on 1 july 2013, in 

this   Vidhan 

Sabha 

Constituency, 

how   many   votes 

were there, etc.  

8.  CIC/SA/A/2014/000357 Lokayukt   Office,  Information with  The   appellant   is   not 

New Delhi
respect   to  present.     The   respondent 

Complaint  authority   have   made   their 

made by him in  submissions.     The 

relation   to   MLA  appellant Shri Vijay Kumar 

Manoj   Shaukin  Garg   has   filed   the   RTI 

Viz   i)   ATR   and  application seeking certain 

the   details   of  information   regarding   his 

the   officer   who  complaints   agains   the 

handled   the  MLA, Shri Manoj Shaukin. 

Complaint   ii)  He   wanted   to   know   the 

details   of   the  action   taken   on   his 

rule   and  complaints   by   the 

Page 15
 regulations  respondent authority.   The 

corresponding  respondent   authority 

the   evidence  represented   by   Mr.   Satya 

collection   with  Parkash,   Asstt.   Director 

respect   to   the  submitted   that   they 

complaint,etc. furnished   the   desired 

information   to   him   point­

wise on 20­11­2013 and he 

has shown the same to the 

Commission   during 

hearing.     He   has   also 

furnished the copy of Delhi 

Lokayukt   and   Uplokayut 

Act   in   Hindi   Language   to 

the   appellant,   in 

compliance   with   the   FAA 

order,   even   though   the 

same   is   available   on   the 

official web­site.  In view of 

this   the   Commission 

closes the appeal.
9.  CIC/SA/A/2014/000414 Department   of  Sought  Appellant   was   present.   The 
Food   and   Supply, 
information   on   4  respondent   authority 
GNCTD
Points   with  submitted that the information 

respect   to   the  has already been furnished to 

Page 16
 First   Appellate  the   appellant   and   a   copy   of 

Authority   of   the  the   same   is   shown   to   the 

respondent  Commission   during   hearing. 

authority   Viz  The appellant agreed that he 

Name   of   FAA  had received the information. 

and   his   details,  Hence   the   Commission 

FAA   personal  closes the appeal. 

staff details etc.

10. CIC/SA/A/2014/000417 Department   of  Information   on   2  Appellant   was   present.  PIO 

Food   and   Supply, 
&  Points   with  submitted   that   generally   the 
GNCTD
CIC/SA/A/2014/000418 respect   to   FPS  information   about   the   stocks 

Shop   in   Uttam  and supplies of the fair price 

Nagar   /   Adarsh  shops are made  available in 

Nagar   Viz   along  the   Public   domain   of   their 

with   the  official website and it will also 

FPS/KOD   ­   the  be available at the respective 

card   detail   for  FPS and the Office.   People 

August   and  who are genuine card holders 

September   2013,  can   have   the   free 

under   PDS,   the  access/inspection   of   this 

quantity   of   food  data.  But the respondent/PIO 

grain   details   etc,  contended   that   in   this   case, 

Page 17
 For   month   of  the appellant is not a genuine 

August   2013  card holder and as per their 

Sale/Stock  Commissioner’s orders, such 

registry   details,  people   are   not   allowed 

all   FPS   shop  inspection   of   the   relevant 

detail   of   the  records.  

number   of 

application 

submitted   under  But   the   Commission 

NFS Act etc. disagrees with the contention 

of   the   respondent   officer   as 

under the RTI Act, inspection 

cannot   be   denied   to   the 

appellant.     Hence   the 

Commission   directs   the 

respondent   authority/PIO   to 

facilitate   inspection   of   the 

relevant   record   to   the 

appellant within 2 weeks from 

the   date   of   receipt   of   this 

order.   
11. CIC/SA/A/2014/000617 Department   of  Appellant through  The   Commission   on   perusal 
& Women   and   Child 
his   RTI  of   the   documents   with 
CIC/SA/A/2014/000618 development, 
& GNCTD applications   had  respect   to   all   the   above 
CIC/SA/A/2014/000984
sought   for  stated   appeals,   and   after 
&
CIC/SA/A/2014/001550 information   with  hearing both sides directs the 

Page 18
 respect   to  PIO   to   provide   a 

application  comprehensive   note   with 

recieved  regard   to   the   information 

concerning  sought to the Appellant within 

Widow’s  one   month  of   receipt   of   this 

daughter  order.     The   information 

marriage finance,  furnished   shall   be   uploaded 

Hanicap Pension,  on   the   department   website 

NFBS  and a copy shall be endorsed 

application..etc to the Commission.

DECISION

9.   The Commission, exercising its power under 19(8)(a) requires the Public Authority to initiate 

inquiry   against   Mr.   Vijay   Kumar   Garg   and   Mr.   Kuldeep   Singh   Yadav   for   their   alleged 

misuse/repetitive   use   of   RTI   motivated   by   private   interest   or   intention   to   harass   so   that 

appropriate action is initiated as per law.  

10.    The Commission directs the respondent authority to prepare a list of the RTI application 

filed by the appellants and the reply of the deparmtnent on this regard and place the reply in 

their official webiste.  This would help the citizens to have information without resorting to RTI 

applications besides curbing the misuse.    

Page 19
 12.     With this observation Commsion rejects all the pending appeals of both the appellant in 

CIC/SA/A/2014/000354,   CIC/SA/A/2014/000353, 

CIC/SA/A/2014/001548,CIC/SA/A/2014/001549,CIC/SA/A/2014/001916,CIC/SA/A/2014/0019

11,CIC/SA/A/2014/001298,CIC/SA/A/2014/001612, CIC/SA/A/2014/001294.

(M. Sridhar Acharyulu)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy

(Babu Lal)
Deputy Registrar

Address of the parties:

1. The CPIO under RTI, Government of NCT of Delhi
Food and Supply Department, Assistant Commissioner, District(West)
No.152, C­Block Community centre, Janakpuri
New Delhi

2. Shri Kuldeep Singh Yadav
F­49, Vishal Colony, 
Nangloi, Delhi­110041

3. Sh. Vijay Kumar Garg,

F­49, Vishal Colony, Nangloi, Delhi – 110041.

Page 20