Central Information Commission
Ashok Kumar Prajapat vs Ut Of Chandigarh on 27 November, 2019
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
File No : CIC/UTOCH/A/2018/134104
Ashok Kumar Prajapat ....अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO,
O/o Chandigarh Transport Department,
Sector - 9,
Chandigarh - 160009. ... ितवादीगण /Respondent
RTI application filed on : 15/01/2018
CPIO replied on : No reply
First appeal filed on : 04/04/2018
First Appellate Authority order : No order
Second Appeal dated : 23/05/2018
Date of Hearing : 25/11/2019
Date of Decision : 25/11/2019
lwpuk vk;qDr : fnO; izdk"k flUgk
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : DIVYA PRAKASH SINHA
Information sought:
The Appellant sought information regarding buses plying from Chandigarh to Ambala Cantt. in the nature of ticket fares in ordinary buses, stoppages determined for these buses as on 01.05.2012; 20.05.2015 and 12.01.2018 etc. Grounds for the Second Appeal:
The CPIO has not provided the desired information.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:-1
Appellant: Not present.
Respondent: Vinod Kumar, Superintendent & CPIO, O/o Chandigarh Transport Undertaking (CTU), Sector - 9, Chandigarh present in person.
CPIO submitted that on 19.01.2018 a letter was sent to the Appellant asking him to submit a fresh IPO due to the discrepancy in the name of the drawee alongwith an additional fee of Rs. 10/- for the annexed documents which consisted of 5 pages. Upon the instance of the Commission, CPIO produced the relevant file in which the RTI Application was dealt. He submitted that Ashwani Dhamija, Superintendent was the then CPIO. CPIO further submitted that neither an interim reply nor any information has been provided to the Appellant subsequent to collection of the requisite fees of Rs. 20/- from the Appellant. He furthermore submitted that collection and collation of relevant records which were to be annexed with the reply dated 09.02.2018 consumed a lot of time due to which there was an inadvertent delay.
Decision Commission upon perusal of facts on record as well as the relevant file produced by the CPIO during the hearing, observes that, the reply to the RTI Application was received in the office of the then CPIO on 09.02.2018 (consisting of 5 pages), however, the same has not been forwarded to the Appellant. Such conduct of the then CPIO tantamounts to grave violation of the provisions of the RTI Act.
Commission further observes that the Appellant has mentioned in his First Appeal that he has sent two postal orders of Rs. 10/- each to the CPIO on 22.02.2018 and finds no reason to disbelief his averment. Subsequently, the averment of the CPIO regarding collection and collation of relevant records consumed time cannot be considered as a cogent reason and finds no merit in his submissions.
In view of the foregoing and on the basis of proceedings during hearing, Commission directs the CPIO, to provide the copy of the correspondence (5 pages) dated 09.02.2018 received from Traffic Manager, CTU along with the relevant documents to the Appellant free of cost within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order. A copy of compliance report to this effect shall be duly sent to the Commission by the CPIO.2
File No : CIC/UTOCH/A/2018/134104 Commission expresses serious displeasure over the conduct of the then CPIO, Ashwani Dhamija, Supritendent for not providing the copy of the correspondence (5 pages) dated 09.02.2018 to the Appellant.
The present CPIO is directed to serve a copy of this order on the then CPIO to take note of the adverse comments of the Commission.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Divya Prakash Sinha ( द काश िस हा )
Information Commissioner ( सूचना आयु )
Authenticated true copy
(अ भ मा णत स या पत त)
Haro Prasad Sen
Dy. Registrar
011-26106140 / [email protected]
हरो साद सेन, उप-पंजीयक
दनांक / Date
Copy to be served through present CPIO to:
Ashwani Dhamija,
Superintendent & then PIO
--(For compliance of directions as above)--
3