Central Information Commission
Dr. Pramila Lochan vs Ministry Of Culture on 30 December, 2010
In the Central Information Commission
at
New Delhi
File No: CIC/WB/A/2010/000535AD
Date of Hearing : December 30, 2010
Date of Decision : December 30, 2010
Parties:
Applicant
Dr.Pramila Lochan
T63, 34th Cross
16th Main
IV TBlock
Jayanagar
Bengaluru 560 041
The Applicant was not present during the hearing
Respondent
Indira Gandhi National Centre for Arts
1 CV Mess
Janpath
New Delhi
Represented by : Shri V.P.Sharma, CPIO and Shri Ravi Kumar
Information Commissioner : Mrs. Annapurna Dixit
___________________________________________________________________
Decision Notice
The Commission directs the PIO to provide the missing information against points (ii) and (iii) of the RTI
Application dt.5.1.10 to the Appellant by 30.1.11.
The Commission directs the PIO to show cause as to why a penalty of Rs.250/ per day (Maximum Rs.25000)
should not be levied on him for not responding to the RTI application within the stipulated time period as
prescribed under the RTI Act.
In the Central Information Commission
at
New Delhi
File No: CIC/WB/A/2010/000535AD
ORDER
Background
1. The Applicant filed an RTI application dt.5.1.10 with the CPIO, IGNCA seeking the following information:
i) The Director, IGNCA SRC issued a press release in June 2009 in local newspapers of Bangalore inviting applications for the posts of (a) Senior Consultant (Academic) and (b) Consultant (event management) Did IGNCA (Administration) issue an official order to the Director IGNCA SRC sanctioning the above posts for appointment at SRC IGNCA If yes, please provide a copy of the order
ii) Are recruitment rules and regulations different for IGNCA and IGNCA SRC If yes, please provide a copy of the IGNCA Office Order mentioning the applicable differences.
iii) Who is the Appointing Authority for IGNCA SRC On not receiving any reply, she filed an appeal dt.12.2.10 with the Appellate Authority and on not receiving any reply filed a second appeal dt.31.5.10 before CIC.
Decision
2. On perusal of the documents on record, the Commission noted that information against only point (i) was provided vide letter dt.21.12.10 and that for the rest of the points information was not provided. The Commission accordingly directs the PIO to provide information against points (ii) and (iii) of the RTI Application dt.5.1.10 to the Appellant by 30.1.11 and the Appellant to submit a compliance report to the Commission by 6.2.11.
3. The Commission directs the PIO to show cause as to why a penalty of Rs.250/ per day (Maximum Rs.25000) should not be levied on him for not responding to the RTI application within the stipulated time period as prescribed under the RTI Act. He is directed to submit his written response to the Commission by 6.2.11.
4. The appeal is disposed of with the above directions.
(Annapurna Dixit) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy (G.Subramanian) Deputy Registrar Cc:
1. Dr.Pramila Lochan T63, 34th Cross 16th Main IV TBlock Jayanagar Bengaluru 560 041
2. The Public Information Officer Indira Gandhi National Centre for Arts 1 CV Mess Janpath New Delhi
3. The Appellate Authority Indira Gandhi National Centre for Arts 1 CV Mess Janpath New Delhi
4. Officer Incharge, NIC