Central Information Commission
Shri Rakesh Pal vs O/O Rni, New Delhi on 20 November, 2009
Central Information Commission
CIC/AD/C/2009/000738
Dated November 20, 2009
Name of the Applicant : Shri Rakesh Pal
Name of the Public Authority : O/o RNI, New Delhi
Background
1. The Applicant filed an RTI application dt.20.12.07 with the CPIO, Ministry of I&B requesting for information against 15 points with regard to reimbursement of TA bills. Dr.Sanjay Roy, OSD(IP), M/o I&B replied on 2.1.08 stating that his application has been transferred to Shri Ashok Kumar, APR, RNI. He requested the Applicant to make future correspondence with them. Not satisfied with the reply, the Applicant filed an appeal dt.12.5.08 with the Press Registrar, RNI stating that no information has been received. The Commission received a complaint dt.23.10.08 from the Applicant stating that he did not receive information either from the CPIO or the Appellate Authority. He added that he could not submit his appeal to CIC within the stipulated time as firstly, he had to appear for an M.B.A exam in the month of July 2008 and secondly, his father was having indifferent condition and there was no one to look after him except the himself. He therefore requested the Commission to condone the delay. The Commission also received a rejoinder dt.27.3.09 from the Applicant stating that he had received for the first time a reply from the CPIO, O/o RNI which he had marked as Annexure 'A'(Copy not in file). In the second para, he stated that he did not receive any such reply either from the CPIO or from the Appellate Authority as claimed by them and that the CPIO has failed to prove that the reply was actually received by the Applicant. He added that neither there is any receipt bearing initials of the Applicant on the office copy of the reply nor have they intimated/clarified that the reply was delivered through Regd. / Speed post. There is also no dispatch number on the office copy. He also stated that the CPIO is misleading by stating that his appeal was not received by them. In this connection, he added that he had personally submitted his appeal to the O/o RNI on 13.5.08 for which receipt was also obtained which he has marked as Annexure 'B' (Copy not in file). . The Commission vide its order dt.30.9.09 directed the CPIO to provide the information to the Applicant by 30.10.09 and also to send an explanation to the Commission to the showcause notice issued for the delay in supply of information by 5.11.09.
2. The Bench of Mrs. Annapurna Dixit, Information Commissioner, scheduled the hearing for November 20, 2009.
3. Shri S.L.Shah, APIO, Shri R.K.Sharma, S.O represented the Public Authority.
4. The Applicant was present during the hearing.
Decision 5 The Respondent submitted that information was provided on 21.1.08 to the address mentioned by the Complainant in his application. He added that preliminary enquiry revealed that the letter has been received at the Dak section of the Ministry and from there it is their responsibility to deliver the letter to the Applicant. The Complainant then stated that he had sent TA bills to RNI and had the signature of the DDO as a token of receipt of the same and the CPIO in his reply had stated that no such TA Bills appear to have been received at RNI. The Respondent, however, maintained that the reply is correct as it is the reply furnished by the custodian of the information. He also produced of the letters sent to the Complainant in this connection.
6. After hearing the arguments on both sides, the Commission is of the opinion that the matter of the missing information needs to be looked into . the CPIO too insisted that the matter be investigated as they do not want such delays in supply of information, in the furure . The Commission accordingly directs that the CPIO under Section 18(2) of the RTI Act, to facilitate an investigation into the matter by a senior official of the Commission with the Complainant too participating in the enquiry with the objective of fixing the responsibility on the person/s who are responsible for non- delivery of the reply to the Complainant and taking appropriate disciplinary action on them. The findings of the enquiry to be submitted to the Commission.
7. The Commission also directs the CPIO to allow inspection of files/records/registers by the Complainant with regard to the submission of TA Bills. If the bills are there, CPIO is directed to provide information on action taken on them. In the event the bills are not available in the records, as stated by the CPIO, an affidavit from the custodian of the information stating that no bills of the Complainant as sought in the RTI application are available on record.
8. The entire exercise should be over by 20.12.09.
9. The complaint is disposed off with above directions.
(Annapurna Dixit) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy:
(G.Subramanian) Asst. Registrar Cc:
1. Shri Rakesh Pal B-I/17 Lajpat Nagar - I New Delhi New Delhi 110 024
2. The CPIO O/o Registrar of Newspapers for India West Block - 8, Wing No.2 R.K.Puram New Delhi
3. Officer incharge, NIC
4. Press E Group, CIC