Central Information Commission
S Vicraman vs Rashtriya Sanskrit Sansthan on 21 June, 2021
Author: Saroj Punhani
Bench: Saroj Punhani
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबागंगनाथमाग , मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
File No : CIC/RSSAN/A/2019/149821
S. Vicraman ....अपीलकता /Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO,
Calicut Adarsha Sanskrit
Vidyapeetha, RTI Cell,
PO Balussery, Calicut Dist.,
Kerala-673612 .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 18/06/2021
Date of Decision : 18/06/2021
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Saroj Punhani
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 29/03/2019
CPIO replied on : 26/04/2019
First appeal filed on : 21/06/2019
First Appellate Authority's order : 17/07/2019
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 11/10/2019
1
Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 29.03.2019 seeking the following information:
1. "Copy of the minutes of the Managing committee meeting of Calicut Adarsha Sanskrit Vidyapeetha, Balussery held in the month of Feb 2019.
2. Copy of the notice issued for the above meeting to all Managing Committee members with Agenda.
3. Copy of the approved minutes of the above meeting (in the form of email and hard copy) received from Rashtriya Sanskrit Sansthan, New Delhi.
4. Copy of the minutes of the Managing Committee Meeting of CAS Vidyapeetha, Balussery held in the month of March 2019.
5. Copy of the approved minutes of the meeting of Vidyapeetha, Balussery held in the month of March 2019 received from Rashtriya Sanskrit Sansthan by Email and hard copy.
6. Copy of the notice issued to the members of the Managing Committee held in the month of March 2019 with Agenda.
7. Copy of the Agenda note submitted by the Member Secretary for the above meeting.
8. Copy of the Minutes of the Finance Committee meeting held in the month of February and March 2019.
9. Copy of the approved minutes of the finance committee received from Rashtriya Sanskrit Sansthan., New Delhi held in the month of Feb 2019 and March 2019.
10. Copy of the budget proposal of the year 2018- 2019 submitted to the Rashtriya Sanskrit Sansthan, New Delhi, by CAS Vidyapeetha, Balussery .
11. Copy of the approved Budget of CAS Vidyapeetha Balussery received from Rashtriya Sanskrit Sansthan New Delhi for the year 2018-2019."
The CPIO furnished a point-wise reply to the appellant on 26.04.2019 stated as follows:-
Point Nos. 1 to 9:- The documents related to the Managing Committee, Finance Committee etc. i.e. Notice, Agenda, Agenda Note, Minutes, Approved minutes etc. may not be provided to the parties without the permission of the Chairman Managing Committee. Point No. 10 & 11:- CPIO annexed the reply copy.2
Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 21.06.2019. FAA's order dated 17.07.2019 held as under:
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Not present. (Appellant could not be contacted for audio conference) Respondent: Prakash Balussery, Principal & CPIO present through audio conference.3
The CPIO reiterated the contents of the FAA's order to state that the Appellant was himself the custodian of all these records when he was the Principal & CPIO of the Vidyapeeth and he knows the functioning of the Vidyapeeth and the apprehensions in disclosing the identity of the members of the various committee meetings as referred to in the RTI Application.
Decision:
The current milieu of the COVID pandemic has necessitated the Commission to take some extraordinary steps in the disposal of cases to avoid further backlog and delays subverting the very purpose of RTI Act which includes inter alia hearing cases through audio conferencing. The instant case being one such instance where even so the Appellant could not be heard for want of contact details, the Commission is constrained to decide the matter based on the strength of the material on record.
In doing so, the Commission at the outset is baffled at the arbitrary manner in which the CPIO & FAA have outrightly denied the information to the Appellant on points no.1-9 of the RTI Application. In fact, the FAA has gone to the extent of passing personal remarks against the Appellant for justifying the denial of the information on the grounds that the Appellant is a retired employee of the Vidyapeeth and is aware of all its functioning. Moreover, the FAA has misinterpreted the RTI Application in a labored way to clearly evade the provision of information in as much as it has been held that the RTI queries do not mention the specific dates etc. even as the Appellant has very specifically mentioned the time period for which he has asked for the details of the various committee meetings i.e for the months of Feb & March 2019.
The Commission takes grave exception to the way in which the CPIO & FAA have dealt with the instant RTI Application & First Appeal as it is reflective of their sheer disregard for the provisions of the RTI Act as they throttled the very letter and spirit of the Act by withholding the information on absolutely untenable grounds.
The CPIO & FAA shall strictly note that under the RTI Act every citizen has a right to information, irrespective of whether the citizen is or was an employee of the Vidyapeeth. Further, the denial of information under the RTI Act should be only as 4 per Section 8 and/or 9 of the RTI Act and the mere absence of larger public interest does not warrant denial of information unless one or more of the exemptions of the RTI Act is invoked and justified. In other words, absence of larger public interest is not a standalone exemption as it has to be read with one or more of the exemption clauses of the RTI Act. The CPIO & FAA are severely warned against obstructing a citizen's right to information in future and recurrence of such acts of evasiveness and displaying ignorance of law will attract penal and disciplinary provisions of the RTI Act against them.
Having observed as above, the CPIO is now directed to revisit points no. 1-9 of the RTI Application and provide a revised point-wise reply to the Appellant incorporating the specific and available information as sought for therein. Further, according a liberal interpretation to the apprehension of the CPIO in disclosing the identity of the managing committee members, the CPIO may redact the names and identifying particulars of the members of the managing committee from the relevant records in consonance with Section 8(1)(g) read with Section 10 of the RTI Act before providing the information to the Appellant. Similarly, in the event that the information as sought for is not available in parts or as a whole on one or more of the said points, the CPIO is directed to categorically state the same against the relevant point of the RTI Application in his revised reply.
The information as directed above shall be provided to the Appellant by the CPIO free of cost through speed/registered post and via email within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order under due intimation to the Commission.
A copy of this order is marked to the FAA for taking note of the admonition and warning issued by the Commission.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Saroj Punhani (सरोजपुनहािन) हािन) Information Commissioner (सूचनाआयु ) 5 Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स#यािपत ित) (C.A. Joseph) Dy. Registrar 011-26179548/ [email protected] सी. ए. जोसेफ, उप-पंजीयक दनांक / Copy to:
Chairman, Managing Committee & FAA Calicut Adarsha Sanskrit Vidyapeetha, PO Balussery, Calicut Dist., Kerala-673612
--(For taking note of the Commission's admonition & warning as above) 6