Central Information Commission
Omveer Singh Rana vs Indian Council Of Agricultural ... on 5 July, 2017
Central Information Commission
Room No.307, II Floor, B Wing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi-110066
website-cic.gov.in
Appeal No. CIC/SH/A/2016/001709/MP
Appellant : Shri Omveer Singh Rana, Patna
Public Authority : Agricultural Technology Application
Research Institute (ICAR), Kolkata
Date of Hearing : June 30, 2017
Date of Decision : July 4, 2017
Present:
Appellant : Present, Shri Niraj Kumar, Advocate - at CIC
Respondent : Dr. P.P. Pal, Principal Scientist, Dr. S.K. Roy, Principal
Scientist - through VC
RTI application : 21.01.2016
CPIO's reply : NA
First appeal : 03.03.2016
FAA's Order : NA
Second appeal : NIL
ORDER
1. Shri Omveer Singh Rana, the appellant, sought a signed copy extended MoU between ICAR and KVK, Chanpura Madhubani; signed copy of bill/invoice of the supply of scientific equipments purchased by KVK Chanpura along with the mode of payment from 1994 to 2013; signed copy of Audited reports, audited balance sheets of KVK Chanpura; etc., through seven points.
2. The appellant, not having received any response/information from the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) within the stipulated time period, approached the First Appellate Authority (FAA) and requested him to provide the desired information//documents. The FAA also does not appear to have adjudicated in the matter. Aggrieved, the appellant came in appeal before the Commission with a request to direct the CPIO to provide the requisite information/documents to the appellant which was not provided till the date of filing of second appeal.
3. The matter was heard by the Commission. The appellant stated that he had sought information on seven points regarding MoU signed between ICAR and Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Madhubani but, no information was provided to him till date, by the CPIO. The appellant, however, later admitted that he had received the documents sought by him in his RTI application on the date of hearing itself but these were unsigned. Further, he was particularly not satisfied with the CPIO's response on points 4, 5, 6 and 7 of his RTI application and insisted on the said documents be sent to him by the CPIO, ICAR and not the KVK concerned. The appellant had however, not attached the CPIO's and the FAA's reply with the RTI application, for the Commission's information.
4. The respondent submitted that all KVKs being a separate public authority had their own CPIOs and the FAAs and therefore, the CPIO on receipt of the appellant's RTI application on 21.01.2016, transferred the same u/s 6(3) to the Central Public Information Officer, KVK Madhubani, on 25.01.2016, for responding to the appellant, directly, as the records in question were kept with the KVK concerned which was being run by S.K. Chaudhary Charitable Trust. The CPIO, KVK Madhubani, provided the details of land records, report of Scientific Advisory Committee (then LMC) meeting for the last 3-4 years, TDS, PF, etc., deposited by the Trust and most of the information as sought by the appellant in his RTI application, on 24.06.2017, by speed post. The respondents further informed the Commission that since most of the documents held by KVK concerned were damaged in the devastating flood, therefore, the CPIO provided whatever information could be collected and that was available on record. Additionally, the FAA had informed the appellant vide order dated 11.04.2016 that no extended MoU was signed between ICAR & KVK Madhubani.
5. On hearing both the parties and perusing the available records, the Commission observes that available information, as per the records, has been already provided to the appellant by the CPIO vide reply dated 24.06.2017. No public interest was stated in the appellant's RTI application. The Commission further observes that the appellant could not have been provided the documents pertaining to the period 1994 to 2013 since most of them were lost/destroyed in the floods and hence, are not available with the respondent authority now and even if these were available, providing such voluminous and massive information to the appellant would have adversely impacted the time and resources of the public authority u/s 7(9) of the RTI Act, 2005 and at most the appellant could have been given an opportunity to inspect the relevant records of the public authority and obtain the information desired by him. The Commission directs the CPIO to provide the attested copies of the documents to the appellant, within a week of the receipt of the order of the Commission. The Commission also advises the appellant to send his RTI application to correct CPIO and to be more discreet in seeking information instead of seeking voluminous information, for timely response to the appellant, in future. The Commission holds that the CPIO has appropriately responded in the matter. The appeal is disposed of.
(Manjula Prasher) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy:
Dy Registrar Copy to:
The Central Public Information Officer The First Appellate Authority Indian Council for Agricultural Indian Council for Agricultural Research, Research, Principal Scientist, Principal Scientist, Agricultural Technology Application Agricultural Technology Application Research Institutes, Zonal Project Research Institutes, Zonal Project Directorate, Zone - II, Bhumi Vihar Directorate, Zone - II, Bhumi Vihar Complex, Salt Lake City, Sector - III, Complex, Salt Lake City, Sector - III, Block - GB, Kolkata - 700 097 Block - GB, Kolkata - 700 097 Shri Omveer Singh Rana, Vishnu Plaza, 203 - B Block, R/No. 16/10, Tahir Lane, Gardanibagh, Patna - 800 002