Central Information Commission
Mr.R H Bansal vs Government Of Nct Of Delhi on 1 August, 2011
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2011/000922/13170Adjunct
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2011/000922
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. R. H. Bansal
A-59, Vijay Vihar, Phase-2,
Rohini, Delhi-110085.
Respondent : Ms. Usha Sharma,
PIO & Deputy Director (Institution),
Department of Social Welfare, GNCTD,
GLNS Complex, Delhi Gate,
New Delhi- 110002
RTI application filed on : 19/07/2010
PIO replied : not replied
First appeal filed on : 16/02/2011
First Appellate Authority order : 04/03/2011
Second Appeal received on : 04/04/2011
Information soughtby the appellant :
1. How many Homes does the Delhi Society Welfare Directorate manages
2. How many people stay in these Home and what is the capacity of the Home
3. How much budget is given to these Home annually
4. How many staff are there in each Home and what is their salary
5. What are the facilities for medical services in these Home ? How many full time as well as part time staff are there pertaining to medical services
6. How many deaths have been there in these Homes in the last 10 years
7. How many workers as well as officers are there in these Homes who have been working since 3 yrs or more
8. Give the copy of the audit reports of each of these homes for the last 10 yrs. Also provide information about the objections raised by the auditor in these audit reports Reply of the PIO:
Not replied First Appeal:
No information has been provided.
Order of the FAA:
The PIO/ Dy. Dir. (Disb.), Dy. Dir. (Social Defence) & Dy. Dir. (Sr. Citizen) is hereby directed to provide the requisite information to the appellant within 21 days.
Ground of the Second Appeal:
The information sought for has still not been provided. The decision of FAA not followed Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing held on June 29, 2011: The following were present:
Appellant: Mr. R. H. Bansal;
Respondent: Absent;Page 1 of 3
"The Appellant states that he has been provided information only about two Homes i.e. Asha Kiran and Sews Sada Lampur. No information has been provided any other Homes. The FAA had ordered PIO/ Dy. Dir. (Disb.), Dy. Dir. (Social Defence) & Dy. Dir. (Sr. Citizen) to provide the information within 20 days but they do not appear to have obeyed the order of the FAA."
Decision dated June 29, 2011:
The Appeal was allowed.
"The Commission directs PIOs Dy. Dir. (Disb.), Dy. Dir. (Social Defence) & Dy. Dir. (Sr. Citizen) to provide the information about all the homes to the Appellant before 20 July 2011.
The issue before the Commission is of not supplying the complete, required information by the PIOs Dy. Dir. (Disb.), Dy. Dir. (Social Defence) & Dy. Dir. (Sr. Citizen) within 30 days as required by the law.
From the facts before the Commission it is apparent that the PIOs are guilty of not furnishing information within the time specified under sub-section (1) of Section 7 by not replying within 30 days, as per the requirement of the RTI Act.
It appears that the deemed PIOs actions attract the penal provisions of Section 20 (1). A showcause notice is being issued to them, and they are directed give their reasons to the Commission to show cause why penalty should not be levied on them.
Dy. Dir. (Disb.), Dy. Dir. (Social Defence) & Dy. Dir. (Sr. Citizen) will present themselves before the Commission at the above address on 01 August 2011 at 11.00AM alongwith their written submissions showing cause why penalty should not be imposed on them as mandated under Section 20 (1). They will also bring the information sent to the appellant as per this decision and submit speed post receipt as proof of having sent the information to the appellant.
If there are other persons responsible for the delay in providing the information to the Appellant the PIO is directed to inform such persons of the show cause hearing and direct them to appear before the Commission with them."
Relevant facts emerging at the show cause hearing held on August 1, 2011:
The following were present:
Respondents: Mr. P. C. Sharma, PIO & DD (Social Security), Mr. R. R. Lakra, PIO & AD - III (Disability) and Mr. B. S. Tolia, AD on behalf of Mr. P. Anand Rao, PIO & DD (Social Defence).
The Respondents have submitted written submissions to the Commission. On perusal of the same, the Commission noted that the RTI application dated 19/07/2010 was forwarded by the RTI Cell to Ms. Usha Sharma, PIO & DD (Institution) on 20/07/2010 for furnishing the requisite information. However, no information appears to have been sent to the Appellant. Moreover, the PIO & DD (Institution) does not appear to have either sought assistance or transfer the RTI application to any other officer.
The RTI application was brought to the notice of the Respondents only after the order of the FAA dated 04/03/2011 wherein all three Respondents were directed to furnish the requisite information to the Appellant within 21 days. On receipt of the FAA's order, Mr. P. C. Sharma, PIO & DD (Social Security) furnished the complete information pertaining to him vide letter 23/03/2011 and once again vide letter dated 14/07/2011 i.e. after the Commission's order dated 29/06/2011.
On receipt of the FAA's order, Mr. R. R. Lakra, PIO & AD - III (Disability) and Mr. P. Anand Rao, PIO & DD (Social Defence) wrote to the PIO & DD (Institution) vide letters dated 08/03/2011 and 09/03/2011 respectively that the RTI application dated 19/07/2010 was never received by them from the office of PIO & DD (Institution) and therefore, no action was required to be taken by them. The Page 2 of 3 Respondents submitted that these letters were also in the nature of clarification and therefore marked to the FAA also. Thereafter, on receipt of the Commission's order dated 29/06/2011, the PIO & DD (Institution) sought assistance from the officers of the concerned homes and furnished the information to the Appellant. Since specific directions were issued to the PIO & AD - III (Disability) and PIO & DD (Social Defence) by the Commission, they also sought assistance from the officers of the concerned homes and furnished the complete information to the Appellant vide letters dated 21/07/2011 and 08/07/2011 respectively.
On the basis of the above, it appears that Ms. Usha Sharma, PIO & DD (Institution) is responsible for the delay in furnishing the complete information to the Appellant.
Adjunct Decision:
In view of the aforesaid, the Commission hereby directs Ms. Usha Sharma, PIO & DD (Institution) to appear before the Commission on August 23, 2011 at 11:30 am along with her written submissions to show cause why penalty should not be imposed on them under Section 20 of the RTI Act. She is directed to produce before the Commission any relevant document that she may have relied on in her written submissions. If there are other persons responsible for not complying with the RTI Act, who have not been included in this show cause notice, Ms. Usha Sharma, PIO & DD (Institution) is directed to serve this show cause to them and direct them to appear before the Commission on 23/08/2011.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
Shailesh Gandhi Information Commissioner August 1, 2011 (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(VV) Page 3 of 3