Central Information Commission
Shri. Cma Ramesh Moreshwar Joshi vs The Institute Of Cost And Works ... on 24 September, 2009
Central Information Commission
2nd Floor, August Kranti Bhawan,
Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi - 110 066
Website: www.cic.gov.in
(Adjunct to Decision No.4282/IC(A)/2009 dated 10th August 2009)
Decision No.4551/IC(A)/2009
F. Nos.CIC/MA/C/2009/000216,
CIC/MA/C/2009/000217
CIC/MA/C/2009/000218
Dated, the 24th September, 2009
Name of the Appellant: Shri. CMA Ramesh Moreshwar Joshi
Name of the Public Authority: The Institute of Cost and Works Accountants of
India (ICWAI)
i
Decision :
1. The Commission vide its Decision notice No.4282/IC(A)/2009 dated 10th
August 2009 made the following observations:
"The appellant has asked for huge information through different
applications. Since he did not receive any response from the respondent,
he has submitted three separate complaints before the Commission.
The complainant is advised to prepare and re-submit a comprehensive list of required information to the CPIO, who should furnish a point-wise response within one month from the date of receipt of fresh application. If any information is to be refused u/s 8(1) of the Act, the grounds for doing so should be clearly indicated for review, if necessary, by the Commission.
The complainant should ensure that the required information is clearly specified as per Section 2(f) of the Act, which requires that the information should be available in any material form.
i "If you don't ask, you don't get." - Mahatma Gandhi 1 The RTI applications dated 5/12/2008 and 5/2/2009 have not been replied within the stipulated period of 30 days. The CPIO is held responsible for violation of section 7(1) of the Act. The CPIO should therefore show cause as to why penalty @ Rs.250/- per day, up to a maximum of Rs.25,000/-, u/s 20(1) of the Act, should not be imposed on him for deemed refusal of the information without any reasonable cause. The President of the respondent or its nominee should also indicate as to why a suitable compensation u/s 19(8)(b) of the Act should not be awarded to the appellant for unnecessary harassment in seeking the information.
The explanations sought for as above under para-7 should be submitted within one month from the date of issue of this decision. The CPIO and the President or his nominee should appear for a personal hearing in the matter on 23rd September 2009 at 12.45 p.m., failing which penalty would be imposed and compensation would be awarded as per the provisions of the Act. The appellant may also be present".
2. In accordance with the above show cause notice, the parties were heard on 23/9/2009. The following were present:
Appellant : Sh. CMA Ramesh Moreshwar Joshi Respondent : 1. Sh. G.N. Venkataraman, President, ICWAI
2. Sh. Sudhir Galande, Chief Executive Officer, ICWAI
3. The respondents stated that complete information, as per available records, have been furnished to the appellant. There is, however, no denial of information.
4. The appellant alleged that the information has been furnished after Commission's directions and that the respondents have not fully complied with Section 4(1) of the Act, even after the lapse of about four years of implementation of the RTI Act. Had the respondent complied with Section 4(1) of the Act, the submission of RTI application and subsequent complaint to the Commission could have been avoided.
5. In response to this, the respondents stated that they have made every effort to comply with the provisions of the Act and they have constantly endeavored to improve upon the disclosure norms as stipulated under the provisions of the Act.
6. It also emerged during the hearing that the appellant and the respondents are professional colleagues for about two decades or so and they agreed to co-
operate in promoting transparency in the functioning of the respondent, ICWAI.
27. In so far as the explanations in respect of the show cause notice to the CPIO u/s 20(1) of the Act is concerned, the CPIO, Sh. Sudhir M Galande, CEO, stated that he was acting as a facilitator to the information seekers and he was "not having direct access or control over the information sought" by a requester. He was, therefore, unable to respond to the RTI applications submitted by the appellant.
8. The fact that the CPIO, Shri. Sudhir M Galande is also the Chief Executive Officer, it is hard to believe that he has no direct access or control over the information maintained by his office, of which he is the CEO. He also did not bothered to respond to the RTI applications dated 5/12/2008 and 5/2/2009 till the above decision notice was issued. We, therefore, hold that he has violated the provisions of the Act, in particular Section 7(1) of the Act, since he did not respond to the RTI applications in question within the stipulated time of 30 days. The appellant was, therefore, constrained to submit his complaints before the Commission on the grounds of deemed refusal of the information. A maximum penalty of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) is, therefore, imposed on Sh. Sudhir M Galande, CPIO, u/s 20(1) of the Act, for denial of information without any reasonable cause.
9. The President of the respondent, ICWAI is directed to deduct Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) from the salary of the CPIO, Sh. Sudhir M Galande in five equal installments of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) each with effect from November 2009, and deposit the same by way of Bankers Cheques drawn in favour of PAO, CAT, payable at New Delhi, to the PAO, Central Administrative Tribunal, C-1, Hutments, Dalhousie Road, New Delhi, under intimation to the Registrar, Central Information Commission.
10. As regards the award of compensation u/s 19(8)(b) of the Act is concerned, the appellant has indeed suffered harassment in seeking information relating to the activities of the respondent, ICWAI. Had the respondent fully complied with Section 4(1) of the Act and furnished the information relating to the official records and communications, the filing of complaints before the Commission and the hearings on 7/8/2009 and 23/9/2009, in which the appellant was present, could have been avoided. The appellant has indeed suffered losses in terms of time and money that was incurred for seeking the information and attending at least two hearings in the Commission, which could have been avoided, had there been a proper response to the RTI applications submitted by him for promoting greater transparency and accountability in the functioning of the respondent, ICWAI. The respondent, ICWAI is, therefore, required to compensate the detriment suffered by the appellant in terms of harassment and losses of time and resources for pursuing the matter, including submission of petitions before the Commission and attending the hearings in the Commission. The President, Mr. G.N. Venkataraman, ICWAI, of the respondent is, therefore, directed to pay a compensation of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen thousand only) u/s 19 (8)(b) of the Act, to Sh. CMA Ramesh Moreshwar Joshi, to compensate 3 for all kinds of losses, as above, suffered by the appellant. The above amount of money should be paid through a bank draft in favour of the appellant, Sh. CMA Ramesh Moreshwar Joshi, within one month from the date of issue of this decision.
11. A compliance report in respect of the directions under paras 9 & 10 above should be furnished to the Commission at the earliest, failing which appropriate action against the respondent would be taken.
12. With these observations, the appeal is disposed of.
Sd/-
(Prof. M.M. Ansari) Central Information Commissioner ii Authenticated true copy:
(M.C. Sharma) Assistant Registrar Name & address of Parties:
1. Sh. CMA Ramesh Moreshwar Joshi, 208, Bee Jumbo Darshan Society, Kol Doongari Road 2, Andheri (E), Mumbai - 400 069.
2. Sh. Sudhir M. Galande, CEO, The Institute of Cost and Works Accountants of India, 12 Sudder Street, Kolkata - 700 016.
3. Sh. G.N. Venkataraman President, The Institute of Cost and Works Accountants of India, 12, Sudder Street, Kolkata - 700 016.
ii "All men by nature desire to know." - Aristotle 4