Central Information Commission
Mrasif Ayaz vs Intelligence Bureau on 12 February, 2016
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi110067
Decision No. CIC/VS/A/2014/902495/SB
Dated 12.02.2016
Appellant : Shri Asif Ayaz,
APCR Karnataka Chapter,
31 Ground Floor GC Colony,
3rd Cross Queens Road Cross, Tasker Town,
Bangalore, Karnataka.
Respondent : Central Public Information Officer,
Intelligence Bureau,
Ministry of Home Affairs,
Level - 5, East Block8, Sector1, R.K. Puram,
New Delhi.
Date of Hearing : 12.02.2016
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:
RTI application filed on : 08.10.2013
CPIO's reply : 18.10.2013/30.10.2013
First Appeal : 12.10.2013
Second Appeal filed on : 13.01.2014
ORDER
1. Shri Asif Ayaz filed an application dated 08.10.2013 under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Ministry of Home 1 Affairs (MHA), seeking information on seven points relating to establishment of the Bureau of Immigration (BOI), India, including (i) documents supporting the origin of Bureau of Immigration, (ii) executive orders of Government of India for creation of BOI and (iii) mandate from Parliament for creation of BOI.
2. Ministry of Home Affairs transferred the RTI application on 18.10.2013 to the Bureau of Immigration.
3. The appellant filed the second appeal dated 13.01.2014 before the Commission on the ground that information sought has been wrongly denied u/s 24(1) of the RTI Act as information pertains to BOI and the same is not an exempted organization in accordance with the ScheduleII.
Hearing:
4. The appellant Shri Asif Ayaz was not present despite notice. The respondent Smt. Geeta Narendra, DCIO, IB was present in person.
5. The respondent submitted that the BOI is a part of the Intelligence Bureau (IB), and IB has been declared an exempt organization under Section 24(1) read with Second Schedule of the RTI Act, 2005. Further, the information sought by the appellant does not pertain to allegations of corruption and human rights violations. The provisions of the RTI Act are, therefore, not applicable in this matter. In view of this, information sought cannot be provided to the appellant. The respondent further submitted that the information sought by the appellant pertains to the MHA as the order of establishment of BOI dated 30.07.1971 was issued by the MHA.
Decision:
2
6. The Commission observes that the information sought pertains to MHA and hence, the RTI application should not have been transferred to the BOI. Accordingly, the CPIO, MHA is directed to ensure that the provisions of the RTI Act are implemented in letter and spirit. The Commission also directs the CPIO, MHA to provide the information sought by the appellant within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
7. The appeal is disposed of. Copy of decision be given free of cost to the parties.
(Sudhir Bhargava) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy (V.K. Sharma) Designated Officer 3