Central Information Commission
Mr.P Kannan vs Ut Of Andaman And Nicobar on 28 February, 2011
Central Information Commission, New Delhi
File No.CIC/SM/A/2010/001485
Right to Information Act2005Under Section (19)
Date of hearing : 28 February 2011
Date of decision : 28 February 2011
Name of the Appellant : Shri P Kannan
S/o. Late Pulla Gounder,
M/s Kembu Studio, Pongy Kyaung,
Port Blair, South Andaman - 744 101.
Name of the Public Authority : CPIO, O/o. the Deputy Commissioner,
District of South Andaman,
Port Blair.
The Appellant was present in person.
On behalf of the Respondent, the following were present:
(i) Shri Muhammad, PIO,
(ii) Shri Gupta, APIO
Chief Information Commissioner : Shri Satyananda Mishra
2. We heard this case through video conferencing. Both the parties were present in the Port Blair studio of the NIC. We heard their submissions.
3. The Appellant had sought the copies of a number of documents relating to issue of bar license in the South Andamans District. In his reply, the CPIO had provided the copy of a particular order relating to his query at number four in his application but had refused to provide any other information against the remaining queries by observing that the desired information was very large in number and would require a lot of time to prepare there by affecting their CIC/SM/A/2010/001485 regular/normal work. The Appellate Authority had endorsed the decision of the CPIO.
4. During the hearing, the Respondents submitted that the total number of case files relating to the grant or rejection of bar licences in this particular district during the specified period of six years would exceed one hundred and the compilation of the information would disproportionately divert the resources of the administration. They reiterated their initial offer that the Appellant could visit the office of the CPIO and inspect all the records and identify those records the copies of which could then be given to him. We tend to agree with this point of view. Looking to the manpower deployed in the local administration in Andamans, the compilation of huge volumes of records would certainly adversely divert the resources of the administration from its other core activities. Therefore, the Appellant should accept the offer for inspection of the records.
5. However, the Appellant made it clear that he did not want to inspect the records. In the light of this, in our opinion, the CPIO can then provide the copies of all the relevant records only for a period of two years. Therefore, we direct the CPIO to provide to the Appellant within 10 working days from the receipt of this order the photocopies of the relevant records relating to the grant/rejection of bar licences in the South Andamans District for the period of two years preceding the date of the RTI application free of charge.
6. The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
7. Copies of this order be given free of cost to the parties. CIC/SM/A/2010/001485 (Satyananda Mishra) Chief Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against application and payment of the charges prescribed under the Act to the CPIO of this Commission.
(Vijay Bhalla) Deputy Registrar CIC/SM/A/2010/001485