Central Information Commission
Miss.Kavita Yadav vs Mcd, Gnct Delhi on 25 May, 2010
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/C/2010/000368/7862
Complaint No. CIC/SG/C/2010/000368
Complainant : Ms. Kavita Yadav
House No. 160, Opp. Kohli Farm
Gawal Pahadi, Gurgaon-122001
Respondent : Public Information Officer/Addl. Director
Education Department (HQ)
Municipal Corporation of Delhi
Nigam Bhawan, Kashmere Gate,
New Delhi-110006
Facts arising from the Complaint:
Ms. Kavita Yadav filed a RTI application with the PIO, DDE, Teacher Recruitment Cell, Nigam Bhawan on 27/10/2009 refiled on 15/01/2010 with a fresh IPO asking for certain information. However on not having received further information within the mandated time, the Complainant filed a complaint under Section 18 of the RTI Act with the Commission. On this basis, the Commission issued a notice to the PIO, O/o the Dy. Education Officer (HQ), MCD, Nigam Bhawan, New Delhi on 22/03/2010 with a direction to provide the information to the Complainant and further sought an explanation for not furnishing the information within the mandated time.
The Commission received a copy of letter dated 15/04/2010 of the PIO/Addl. Director, MCD, Education Department, Nigam Bhawan, to the Complainant vide which information has been provided. On perusal of the information provided it has been observed that the same is inappropriate and incomplete. For most part of the information it has been stated that the information is available in the zone or pertains to the zone. This is not an appropriate response. The Commission has received neither any communication nor a copy of information as proof of having provided it to the Complainant in this regard from the zonal office thereby prima facie it appears that no appropriate information has been provided. The PIO should have sought assistance under Section 5(4) of the RTI Act from concerned zone/persons and provided the complete information to the Complainant. Further the PIO has provided no explanation for the delay in responding to the RTI Application filed on 15/01/2010. There appears to be a delay of over 45 days in responding to the RTI Application.
Decision:
The Complaint is allowed.
In view of the aforesaid, the PIO is hereby directed to ensure that correct and complete information, by seeking assistance under Section 5(4) from concerned persons, wherever applicable, with regard to the RTI Application dated 15/01/2010 is provided to the Complainant before 15/06/2010. Proof of dispatch of information should be sent to the Commission before 22/06/2009. The failure to comply with the provisions of the RTI Act and the delay and inaction on the PIO's part in providing the complete information amounts to Page 1 of 2 willful disobedience of the Commission's direction and also raises a reasonable doubt that the denial of information may be malafide. The PIO is therefore, asked to submit a written explanation to show cause as to why penalty should not be imposed and disciplinary action be recommended against him under Section 20 (1) & (2) of the RTI Act before 22/06/2010 Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
Any information in compliance with this order will be provided free of cost as per section 7(6) of RTI, Act, 2005 Shailesh Gandhi Information Commissioner 25 May 2010 ( In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(SP) Page 2 of 2