Central Information Commission
Mr Shamim Akhter vs Staff Selection Commission on 10 September, 2015
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
CLUB BUILDING (NEAR POST OFFICE)
OLD JNU CAMPUS, NEW DELHI110 067
Decision No.CIC/SM/C/2012/001168/SB
Dated: 10.09.2015
Complainant: Shri Shamim Akhtar,
VIIIBharpura, PostSonpur,
DisttSaran,
Bihar841 101.
Respondent: CPIO,
Central Administrative Tribunal,
Bangalore Bench, 2nd Floor,
BDA Complex, Indira Nagar,
Bangalore, Karnataka560 038.
Date of Hearing: 03.09.2015
ORDER
1. The Commission vide order dated 27.07.2015 issued a Show Cause notice under Section 20(1) of the RTI Act against the CPIO, Central Administrative Tribunal, Bangalore for not providing information to the complainant. The concerned CPIO was directed to appear before the Commission on 03.09.2015 at 01.15 a.m. along with his explanation.
Hearing:
2. The complainant and respondent did not appear before the Commission. However, Shri K. Nagaraju, CPIO & Deputy Registrar, submitted his explanation in the matter.
3. Shri K. Nagaraju in his explanation submitted that he was not actively engaged in handling the RTI applications. He was only assisting the CPIO. The CPIO was directly dealing with the RTI applications. Further, he had no experience in dealing with the RTI applications and no training was given to him. The RTI application of the complainant was written in Hindi and he was not well versed with Hindi. He put his best efforts to have the RTI application translated but there was no translator. Further, he was charged with additional duties of Drawing and Disbursing Officer w.e.f. May 2010 along with the regular duty of Deputy Registrar and did not have sufficient time to look after the other areas. Therefore, he could not attend the RTI application promptly.
Decision:
4. The Commission vide order dated 27.07.2015 directed the CPIO to provide the requisite information to the complainant by 21.08.2015. However, there is no evidence on record that the information sought in the RTI application has been provided to the complainant.
5. The Commission considered the work load faced by the CPIO in the discharge of his regular duty including the work related to RTI applications as well as lack of experience in handling RTI applications. The Commission also noted the difficulty faced by Shri K. Nagaraju in dealing with the RTI application of the complainant which was in Hindi. However, this cannot be an excuse not to attend to the RTI application of the complainant. This indicates callousness on the part of the CPIO in dealing with RTI applications. The Commission also observes that on the two occasions of hearing i.e. 27.07.2015 and 03.09.2015 the respondent did not appear despite notice. The respondent also did not comply with the order of the Commission dated 24.08.2011 and 27.07.2015. The Commission observes that this is a gross violation of RTI Act on the part of Shri K. Nagaraju, CPIO & Deputy Registrar. The Commission, therefore, imposes a penalty of Rs. 2500/ against Shri K. Nagaraju, CPIO & Deputy Registrar for not replying to the RTI application dated 26.06.2012 and also for not complying with the Commission's order dated 24.08.2011 and 27.07.2015.
6. The Appellate Authority is directed to recover the amount of Rs. 2500/from the salary payable to Shri K. Nagaraju, CPIO & Deputy Registrar, by way of Demand Draft drawn in favour of 'PAO CAT'. The Demand Draft should reach the Commission by 21.10.2015. The Demand Draft should be sent to Shri S. P. Beck, Joint Secretary & Addl. Registrar, Room No. 302, Central Information Commission, B Wing, 2nd Floor, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi 110 066
7. The Show cause is disposed of accordingly. Copy of decision be given free of cost to the parties.
(Sudhir Bhargava) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy (V.K. Sharma) Designated Officer Copy for information and necessary action to: Shri S.P Beck, JS (Admin), Central Information Commission, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Kama place, New Delhi 110066