Central Information Commission
R L Kain vs Ministry Of Social Justice & ... on 19 August, 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/MOSJE/A/2020/102078
R K Kain ....अपीलकता /Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
1.CPIO,
M/o Social Justice & Empowerment,
RTI Cell, A-Wing, Shastri Bhawan,
New Delhi - 110001
2.CPIO
DAIC, Dr. Ambedkar International
Centre, RTI Cell, 15 Janpath, New
New Delhi - 110001 .... ितवादीगण /Respondent(s)
Date of Hearing : 05/08/2021
Date of Decision : 17/08/2021
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Saroj Punhani
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 21/10/2019
CPIO replied on : Not on record
1
First appeal filed on : 06/12/2019
First Appellate Authority's order : Not on record
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 13/01/2020
Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 21.10.2019 with the CPIO, MoSJ seeking the following information:
1. "Whether two letters vide No. BRAVM/2019/102 and 103 dated 16.09.2019 addressed to two Ministers of SJE, New Delhi has been received, if yes, what is the day-today progress report on the Acton taken Report on my complaint for misrepresentation of facts in a caption of joint photograph consisting of S. N. Mukheriee, Joint Secretary, Constituent Assembly, Dr. B. R. Ambedkar and Begum Azaz Rasul, Member Constituent Assembly with which S. N. Mukherjee has been declared as PS of Dr. B. R. Ambedkar, Nanak Chand Rattu?
2. Disclose the name and designation of officer and political hierarchy who gave this wrong caption and accorded approval due to his half baked and poor knowledge on the literature of Baba Saheb Dr. B. R. Ambedkar the Father of the Indian Constitution.
3. Supply the copy of source material from where the proposer got this misleading and wrong caption, in case there is no correct authority with them what action has since been taken against the delinquent officer who proposed and Who finally approved. please supply the results of inquest in the matter,.
4. It is true and correct that one imaginary joint vinyl picture of Baba Saheb Dr. B. R. Ambedkar handing over the Constitution to Dr. Rajendra Prasad, President along with C. Rajagopalachari Abul Kalam Azad, Dr. Rajendra Prasad, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel and Pt. Jawaharlal Nehru on 24th January, 1950 has been displayed at the first floor on glass partition wall, if yes, what is the justification of display of imaginary vinyl picture when original rare photograph is available with Government agencies, please apprise as to why the distortion of facts has been represented when real photographs of recent past history of this great event are very much available with MSJE at Dr. Ambedkar National Memorial, please enumerate the reasons for misrepresentation of facts by officers of half baked and poor knowledge?
5. Whether the 'Completion Certificate of Dr. Ambedkar International Centre, New Delhi has been issued by NDMC, New Delhi for this building and 2 lift operation Certificate has been obtained from Chief Fire Service, New Delhi in respect of all Lifts which are under use to cater the needs of visitors, if yes, please arrange to supply certified copy of CC and Fire Service Department for lift operation, in case no certificates has been obtained before occupation on 7th December, 2018 what are the reasons for criminal negligence which needs prosecution?
6. It is true and correct that building of Dr. Ambedkar International Centre, 15, Janpath, New Delhi was inaugurated by Hon'ble Prime Minister Sh. Narendra Modi on 7th December, 2018 by violating Model Code of Conduct of Gujarat State Assembly in 2018, in this connection please arrange to supply copy of letter written: by Minister of Social Justice and Empowerment to Prime Minister inviting him to inaugurate the building without obtaining completion certificate, in case no such information was sent to PM then how Building Byelaws were. violated by MSJE and how building was occupied without obtaining CC from NDMC and xx. operation certificate from Delhi Fire Services till date, as per numerous complaints whether any responsibility has since been fixed by the Ministry of SJE till date, it yes, please supply the copy thereof in case no responsibility fixed then who is responsible for this eventuality and violation of Building Byelaws and provisions of Fire Service Department willfully and knowingly in utter disregards to statutory laws, please enumerate the reasons thereof for taking legal action against violators'?
7. Please confirm that a simple Memoranda was obtained under pressure from MSJ and PMO from NDMC, if yes, what was the compulsion of MSJE to open the incomplete building and undeveloped library project which is still hanging in fire, please enumerate the compelling reasons for violation of statutory provisions of building byelaws and Fire laws in respect of Lifts for taking legal action against delinquent officer please supply their names and designations.
8. Please confirm that no penalty amount of Rs.1,88,004/- levied by NDMC on different deficiencies till 7-12 2018 has been paid and a Memoranda was obtained under pressure instead of getting a deficiency Memo for lapses, if yes, please disclose the names and designations of all executive officers and political hierarchies who are directly responsible for violation of Building Byelaws and non-payment of penalty for taking legal action?
9. Please disclose whether the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment has initiated any project for collecting rare historical audio and video recordings of Baba Saheb Dr. B. R. Ambedkar of Constituent Assembly or 3 elsewhere, if yes, please supply the photo copies of this exercise under taken under the aegis of expert, if not what are the hurdles trampling for carrying on his legacy through half baked and poor knowledge bureaucrats for obtaining audio video recordings from government agencies or from private sources for official and private activities?
10. It is true and correct that Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment had issued a gazette notification in 2015 for celebration of 'Constitution Day' on every 26th November but it had not been reviewed by Secretary or by Minister in-charge of SJE as to whether any Government agency had observed the event or not, if the answer to this quarry is in positive please arrange to supply the review committee's report, if no review was carried out since after 2015 to till date what are the reasons for playing with this gimmicks and with the sentiments of teeming millions or followers of Baba Saheb Dr. B. R. Ambedkar by NDA Government?
11. Whether it is true and correct that Supreme Court upheld the exercise of Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment for re-enactment of SC/ST Act, 2019 and also adjudicated the appeal setting aside its earlier decision for prior permission of competent authority before arrest of an accused, if yes, what action had since been taken against former Speaker Lok Sabha Smt. Sumitra Mahajan, who had publically opined through Dainik Jagran dated 1st October, 2018 that "new SC/ST Act is a chocolate for SC/ST people and later on we will snatch it away from them and earlier she also attributed on 19th September, 2018 to take a re-look into reservation policy what action had been initiated against her by Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment suo moto or on newspaper comments or communications received either from President of India or PMO or SC/ST Commissions, please enumerate the details of action taken against her, in case no action was taken against, her please state what are the reason for ignoring and saving her from serious violation of SC/ST Act or Constitutional provisions on job reservations for SC/ST people by a constitutional functionary, please enumerate the reasons in details for taking legal action'?
12. Whether MSJE has gone through Lok Sabha-2016 publication 'Making of the Constitution' with which the image of Baba Saheb Dr. B. R. Ambedkar has been outraged by withholding his photos and printed photos of other leaders congratulating President on 26th November, 1949 for passing of' Constitution and signing of Constitution on 24th January, 1950 but none of his photograph has been printed impugned book carry much more deficiencies, if yes, what action has been taken by MSJE against Speaker, 4 Lok Sabha for deliberate insult and humiliation publically through government publication, in case no action was taken which require their prosecution for national insult?"
The CPIO, MoSJ transferred the RTI Application under Section 6(3) of the RTI Act to the CPIO, DAIC (Respondent No.2) on 27.11.2019.
Being dissatisfied with the transfer of the RTI Application to Respondent No.2, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 06.12.2019. FAA's order, if any, is not available on record.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the non-receipt of information from either of the Respondents, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Present through audio conference.
Respondent No.1: Paras Kumar Singh, Under Secretary & Nodal CPIO present through audio conference.
Respondent No.2: Dr. Varun Gulati, Associate Professor & CPIO present through audio conference.
The Appellant stated that he is aggrieved with the fact that the transfer of the RTI Application by Respondent No.1 took 49 days which is in violation of the time stipulations prescribed under the RTI Act. He further stated that even his First Appeal was not responded to by Respondent No.1, rather it was forwarded to Ambedkar Foundation who in turn replied after about 84 days of filing the RTI Application stating that the matter does not come under their jurisdiction. He continued to insist upon the fact that the Ambedkar Foundation and the Ministry exercise control over the Dr. Ambedkar International Centre and yet they did not provide the information to him. In furtherance of these arguments, the Appellant urged for imposition of penalty on the CPIOs.
Respondent No.1 submitted that since there was no information available with the Ministry on the queries mentioned in the RTI Application, the case was forwarded to Respondent No. 2 and the Ambedkar Foundation as these 5 organizations deal with all Ambedkar related subject matters. He further submitted that due to a fire incident in the RTI Cell, there was an unintentional delay caused in transferring the RTI Application as retrieving the papers took some time and prayed for the omission to be condoned.
Respondent No.2 tendered his unconditional regret for the failure to provide any reply to the RTI Application and urged that he has not been able to locate the relevant papers as he has assumed the charge of the office only recently. He further submitted that however he has gathered prior to the hearing that the vinyl caption under reference has been already removed before the pandemic and the concerned person who was responsible for the distortion of the historical facts has been asked for explanation.
Decision:
The Commission at the outset takes grave exception to the fact that upon transfer of the RTI Application, Respondent No.2 failed to provide any reply to it within the stipulated time frame of the RTI Act which amounts to a deemed refusal to provide the information. Further, no tenable explanation was forthcoming in this regard from the CPIO during the hearing.
In view of the foregoing, the Commission directs Dr. Varun Gulati, Associate Professor & CPIO to serve a copy of this order to the concerned then CPIO to show cause as to why penal action should not be initiated against him/her for the prima-facie obstruction caused to the Appellant's right to information. The written submissions of the then CPIO along with supporting documents, if any, should reach the Commission within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order.
Dr. Varun Gulati, Associate Professor & CPIO is directed to send to the Commission a due intimation of the service of the order to the concerned then CPIO.
Similarly, Respondent No.1 is directed to send his written submissions explaining the inordinate delay caused in transferring the instant RTI Application under Section 6(3) of the RTI Act to Respondent No.2. The said written submissions of Respondent No.1 should reach the Commission within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order.6
As regards the information sought for in the RTI Application, the Commission observes that largely the queries do not conform to Section 2(f) of the RTI Act as the Appellant has sought for clarifications and justifications to be provided by the CPIO based on conjecture. Nonetheless, points no.1 & 5 of the RTI Application warrant provision of available information to the Appellant by the Respondents.
In view of the foregoing, Respondent No.1 is directed to provide a cogent reply to point no.1 of the RTI Application stating the factum of receipt of the two letters referred therein as well as available information regarding the action taken on the said letters.
Further, Respondent No.2 is directed to provide the available and specific information as sought for at point no.5 of the RTI Application to the Appellant.
The information as directed above shall be provided free of cost to the Appellant by the Respondent(s) respectively, within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order under due intimation to the Commission.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Saroj Punhani (सरोजपुनहािन) हािन) Information Commissioner (सूचनाआयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स#यािपत ित) (C.A. Joseph) Dy. Registrar 011-26179548/ [email protected] सी. ए. जोसेफ, उप-पंजीयक दनांक / 7 Copy to be served through Respondent No.2 to:
Then CPIO (as on 27.11.2019) Dr. Ambedkar International Centre
--(For compliance of directions as above) 8