A.P. INFORMATION COMMISSION (Under Right to Information Act, 2005) Samachara Hakku Bhavan, D.No.5-4-339, “4” Stored Commercial Complex, Housing Board Building, Mojam-jahi Market, Hyderabad – 500 001. Phone Nos.040- 24740240 / 246 (o), (F) 040-24740592 Appeal No.1126/SIC-Dr.V.V/2014 Dated: 19-03-2014 Name of the Appellant & Address Sri M.V.V. Rama Krishna D.No. 56-2-15, SugunaNivas, Canara BBank Street, Patamata, Vijayawada – 10 Name of the Respondents Public Information Officer(U/RTI Act, 2005) O/o The Engineer-in-Chief,(R&B), Administration, Erramanzil, Hyderabad 1st Appellate Authority (U/RTI Act, 2005) The Engineer-in-Chief,(R&B), Administration, Erramanzil, Hyderabad ORDER 1. Sri M.V.V. Rama Krishna, has filed 2nd appeal dated 07-01-2014 which was received by this Commission on 17-01-2014 for not getting the information sought by him from the PIO / O/o The Engineer-in-Chief,(R&B), Administration, Erramanzil, Hyderabad and 1st Appellate Authority / The Engineer-in-Chief,(R&B), Administration, Erramanzil, Hyderabad. 2. The brief facts of the case as per the appeal and other records received along with it are that the appellant herein filed an application dated 20-10-2013 before the PIO requesting to furnish the information under Sec.6(1) of the RTI Act, 2005. 3. The Public Information Officer has not furnished the information to the Appellant. 4. Since the appellant did not receive the information from the Public Information Officer within the stipulated time, he filed 1st appeal dated 27-11-2013 before the 1st Appellate Authority requesting him to furnish the information sought by him u/s 19(1) of the RTI Act, 2005. 5. The 1st Appellate Authority also did not furnish the information to the Appellant. 6. The appellant stated that as he did not get the information from the 1st Appellate Authority even after 30 days of filing his 1st appeal, he preferred this 2nd appeal before this Commission requesting to take action against the PIO and 1st Appellate Authority for not furnishing information sought by him and also to arrange to furnish the information sought by him u/s 19(3) of the RTI Act, 2005. 7. nd The 2 ::2:: appeal was taken on file and Notices were issued to both the parties for hearing on 19-03-2014. 8. The case is called on 19-03-2014. The Appellant is present. The Respondent/PIO is absent, but APIO is present. The first Appellate Authority is absent. The PIO submitted that after receipt of 6(1) application dated 20-10-2013 and 19(1) application dated 27-11-2013, a reply was given to the appellant through letter dated 28-01-2014 rejecting the application under the ground that the information would amount to creation of information.PIO is not supposed to create the information and the supply of information sought in a particular form would disproportionately divert the resources of the public authority. The appellant submitted that he has not received the relevant information. The Commission directs the PIO to furnish the relevant information (seniority lists as required) to the appellant, free of cost, within 15 days from the date of receipt of the order, by RPAD, under intimation to the Commission. DR. VARRE VENKATESHWARLU STATE INFORMATION COMMISSIONER Authenticated by (K.N.Kristappa) Asst. Registrar Copy to SO / SF