Central Information Commission
Sanjay Bhardwaj vs Office Of The Additional Distt. ... on 12 April, 2021
Author: Heeralal Samariya
Bench: Heeralal Samariya
के न्द्रीयसूचनाआयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबागंगनाथमागग, मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नईनिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
नितीयअपीलसख्ं या / Second Appeal No.: CIC/ADDDM/A/2019/116920
Sanjay Bhardwaj .....अपीलकर्ता/Appellant
VERSUS/बनतम
PIO,
Sub-DivisionalMagistrate-(Kapashera)
(Government of NCT of Delhi),Kapashera,
South-West District, Old Terminal Tax
Building, Kapashera, NewDelhi-110037.
2. Public Information Officer under RTI
Sub-Divisional Magistrate-(Najafgarh)
(Government of NCT of Delhi),Najafgarh, South-West
District, S.D.M.-NajafgarhOffice Complex, Tura Mandi,
Najafgarh, New Delhi-110043.
...प्रतर्वतदीगण/Respondent
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 10-09-2018
CPIO replied on : Not on record
First appeal filed on : 15-11-2018
First Appellate Authority order : 31-12-2018
Second Appeal received at CIC : 10-04-2019
Date of Hearing : 12-04-2021
Date of Decision : 12-04-2021
lwpuk vk;qDr : Jhहीरालालसामररया
Information Commissioner : Shri Heeralal Samariya
Information sought:
The Appellant sought information regarding certified documents in the matter stated in mutation order M-550/Teh/P/2007 dated 11-07-2007 in the matter Sanjay & ors Versus Bishamber.Page 1 of 4
Having not received any response from the PIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 15.11.2018.
The FAA (ADM/SW), vide order dated 31.12.2018, directed the PIO (SDM, Najafgarh) to provide an appropriate reply to the appellant within stipulated time period. The order is as under:
The FAA (ADM/ New Delhi), vide order dated 08.03.2019, held as under:
Written submissions have been received from PIO, SDM (Najafgarh), GNCTD, vide letter dated 07.04.2021, as under:
Grounds for Second Appeal:
The PIO has not provided information to the Appellant.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present: -
Appellant: Present in person Respondent: (1) Mr. R.K. Gupta, Reptt of PIO, Tehsildar, O/o Sub-Divisional Magistrate-(SW) Page 2 of 4 (2) Mr. Manoj Rawat, Reptt of PIO, PA to SDM (Najafgarh), O/o Sub-Divisional Magistrate-(Najafgarh) Appellant submitted that he has received no reply from the PIO.
The Respondent (2) submitted that information, as sought in the instant RTI Application, is not available in the record room of O/o SDM (Najafgarh). Therefore, no information was provided to the Appellant. A copy of updated reply, vide letter dated 09.04.2021, was provided to the Appellant as well. Furthermore, he submitted that he is willing to provide an opportunity of inspection of relevant records to the Appellant.
Decision:
At the outset Commission expresses severe displeasure over the conduct of then PIO, O/o SDM Najafgarh, in having not provided any reply to the Appellant within the stipulated time frame, then PIO is hereby directed to file a written explanation justifying the said conduct, failing which an action under Section 20(1) and 20(2) of the RTI Act will be initiated against him/her, if necessary. Then PIO is further directed to send copy of supporting documents on which he/she relies upon in his/her submission as well as copy of reply sent on the RTI Application, if any. Now, Commission was unable to procure the name of the then PIO, therefore Commission directs then PIO to send his written submissions through the present PIO. In doing so, if any other persons are also responsible for the omission, the then PIO shall serve a copy of this order on such other persons under intimation to the Commission and ensure that written submissions of all such concerned persons are sent to the Commission. The said written submission of then PIO along with submissions of other concerned persons, if any, should reach the Commission within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.
The present PIO will ensure service of this order to then PIO.
Commission observes that Appellant is not satisfied with the submissions made by PIO. He further alleges that relevant information has been deliberately withheld, whereas PIO claims that whatever information was available on record has been provided to the appellant and nothing is withheld. Therefore, Commission in order to resolve the said anomaly directs the PIO to provide an opportunity to the Appellant to inspect available and relevant information as sought in the instant RTI Application, on a mutually decided date and time duly Page 3 of 4 intimated to the Appellant telephonically and in writing. Copy of documents, if desired by the Appellant upon inspection should be provided upon payment of the prescribed fees as per RTI Rules, 2012. Commission's directions should be complied within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order and compliance report to this effect be duly sent to the Commission by the PIO.
Furthermore, to allay any subsequent apprehension of the Appellant, Commission directs the PIO to file an appropriate affidavit stating that available and relevant records as sought in the RTI Application was provided to him for inspection and no material information has been withheld. The said affidavit shall be sent by the PIO to the Commission with its copy duly endorsed to the Appellant within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Heeralal Samariya (हीरालाल सामररया) ू ना आयुक्त) Information Commissioner (सच Authenticated true copy (अभिप्रमाभितसत्याभितप्रभत) Ram Parkash Grover (रतम प्रकतश ग्रोवर) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26180514 Copy to be served through present PIO to:
Then PIO, Public Information Officer under RTI Sub-Divisional Magistrate-(Najafgarh) (Government of NCT of Delhi),Najafgarh, South-West District, S.D.M.-NajafgarhOffice Complex, Tura Mandi, Najafgarh, New Delhi-110043.
--(For taking note of the adverse remarks and complying with the directions of the Commission ) Page 4 of 4