Central Information Commission
Harish Kristapati vs Ministry Of Home Affairs on 4 December, 2019
के न्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ मागग, मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई दिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
नितीय अपील संख्या / Second Appeal No. CIC/MHOME/A/2018/623783
Harish Kristapati ... अपीलकताग/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
1. CPIO, Bureau of ...प्रनतवािीगण /Respondent
Immigration, Ministry of Home
Affairs, New Delhi
2. CPIO, Foreigners Division,
Ministry of Home Affairs, New
Delhi
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:
RTI : 09.02.2018 FA : 01.05.2018 SA : N/A
Hearing : 01.11.2019,
CPIO : 06.06.2018 FAO : N/A
02.12.2019
ORDER
1. The appellant filed an online application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Ministry of Home Affairs seeking information on five points pertaining to the visit of some Page 1 of 7 foreign nationals in India including, inter-alia, (i) action taken on the complaints filed regarding the visit of one Ms. Anne Graham Lotz in India, the number of times visited, the type of visa, purpose and place of visit, (ii) details of visit of Pastor Colonel and other Pastors, and (iii) action taken by MHA to prevent conversion activities, etc.
2. The appellant filed a second appeal before the Commission on the grounds that insufficient and false information has been provided to him. The appellant requested the Commission to take appropriate action against the CPIO.
Hearing:
3. The appellant, Shri Harish Kritapati attended the hearing through video conferencing and the respondent, Shri Harminder Singh, DCIO, Bureau of Immigration, Ministry of Home Affairs attended the hearing in person.
4. The appellant submitted that no reply in response to his RTI application has been received by him within stipulated time period. However, after filing the first appeal he had received a reply dated 06.06.2018 from the MHA stating that no complaint has been received in Foreigners Division, MHA about the visit of Ms. Anne Graham Lotz. He was also informed that his RTI application was forwarded to the Bureau of Immigration under Section 6(3) of the RTI Act. The appellant contended that information furnished was incorrect as several complaints have been filed with various divisions of MHA regarding visa violation by Ms. Anne Graham Lotz. The appellant submitted that one Shri A.S. Santosh and C.H. Kalyan Kumar vide letter dated 22.05.2018 submitted a complaint to the Joint Secretary (Foreigners Division) as well as Director (Foreigners Division), MHA of visa violation and Page 2 of 7 conversion activities by Foreign evangelists in India. The complaint against Ms. Anne Graham Lotz was also filed vide letter dated 29.12.2017 which was also endorsed to the Director (Foreigners Division), MHA, New Delhi. The appellant further submitted that he had sought information from the CPIO, Foreigners Division, MHA. Further, the first appeal was also filed against MHA. The appellant contended that the RTI application was wrongly transferred to the Bureau of Immigration as he had sought information from the CPIO, Foreigners Division, MHA. In view of this, he requested that the matter be adjourned and the CPIO, Foreigners Division, MHA be directed to appear on the next date of hearing.
Interim Decision:
5. The Commission considered the request of the appellant and adjourns the matter to 02.12.2019 at 12.10 PM. The Commission directs the Registry of this Bench to issue a fresh Notice for Hearing to the parties concerned including the CPIO, Foreigners Division, MHA.
Hearing om 02.12.2019:
6. The appellant, Shri Harish Kritapati attended the hearing through video conferencing. The respondent, Shri Pramod Kumar, Director (F) and CPIO, Foreigners - IV Section, Ministry of Home Affairs, and Shri Harminder Singh, DCIO, Bureau of Immigration, Ministry of Home Affairs attended the hearing in person.
7. The appellant submitted that he had sought information from the CPIO, Foreigners Division, MHA, however, the RTI application was wrongly transferred to the Bureau of Immigration (BoI). Further, no reply with respect to the information Page 3 of 7 sought has been received from the Foreigners Division, MHA till date. The appellant further submitted that as per Section 6(3) of the RTI Act, where an application is made to public authority for an information which is held by another public authority, the CPIO has to transfer the RTI application to that public authority within five days from the date of receipt of the RTI application. However, in the present matter, the RTI application was filed on 09.02.2018 and the same was transferred under Section 6(3) of the RTI Act to the Bureau of Immigration vide letter dated 06.06.2018 i.e. more than 3 months after the filing of the application. The appellant requested the Commission to direct the respondent to provide the information sought by him and to impose penalty on the respondent for transferring the RTI application to Bureau of Immigration much beyond the stipulated period as per the provisions of the RTI Act.
8. The respondent submitted that the RTI application in question bears reference to complaints made on 05.01.2018 regarding the visit of Anne Graham to India. Since no such complaints were received in the Foreigners Division, the appellant was informed accordingly vide letter dated 06.06.2018. The respondent further submitted that the power to take action against Foreign nationalists has been entrusted to the Bureau of Immigration and thus, the said RTI application was transferred to the Bureau of Immigration to ascertain if any such complaints have been received by them or any action has been taken at their end. Further, the information sought under point no. 1 regarding how many times Anne Graham has visited India and on what visa, as well as point no. 2, 3 and 4 of the RTI application pertains to the Bureau of Immigration, and therefore, the said RTI was transferred to Bureau of Immigration. The respondent tendered his unconditional apology for Page 4 of 7 the delay in transferring the RTI application and requested the Commission to condone the same. The respondent further stated that he was appointed as the Director (Visa) around the time when the RTI application was filed, and since the subject was new to him, he was unaware of the fact that the information sought pertains to the Bureau of Immigration. It was at the time of replying to the said RTI that the respondent was apprised of the said fact and thus, therefore, the RTI application was transferred to Bureau of Immigration. The respondent affirmed that there was no malafide intention to withhold the information and requested the Commission to take a lenient view in the matter.
Decision:
9. The Commission, after hearing the submissions of both the parties and perusing the records, observes that the information sought vide the latter part of point no. 1 (number of times Anne Graham visited India and on what Visa along with her purpose and places of visit), point nos. 2 and 4 pertains to visit of foreigners/ Visa etc. and hence, is held by the Bureau of Immigration. Thus, the CPIO, MHA had rightly transferred the RTI application to the Bureau of Immigration under Section 6(3) of the RTI Act. The Commission also notes that Bureau of Immigration has been declared an exempt organization under Section 24(1) read with the Second Schedule of the RTI Act, 2005. Further, the information sought by the appellant does not pertain to allegations of corruption and human rights violations. Hence, the abovementioned information has rightly been denied by Bureau of Immigration under Section 24(1) of the RTI Act.
10. The Commission also notes that as per the respondent the information sought vide point no. 1 of the RTI application could not be provided since no complaints Page 5 of 7 were received in the Foreign Division regarding the visits of Anne Graham. The Commission, therefore, directs the respondent, CPIO, Foreigners Division, MHA to file an affidavit with the Commission deposing that no complaints were received in the Foreigners Division, MHA regarding the visit of Anne Graham to India. A copy of the affidavit shall also be provided to the appellant.
11. The Commission also notes that as per respondent (MHA), the powers to take action against Foreign nationals for violation of visa conditions has been entrusted to the Bureau of Immigration. The Commission, therefore, directs the respondent to provide a copy of the notification regarding delegation of power to take action against foreign nationals for violation of visa conditions to the Bureau of Immigration. A copy of the abovesaid notification shall also be provided to the appellant. The above directions of the Commission shall be complied with, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
12. With regards to the delay in transfer of the RTI application, the Commission notes that there has been a considerable delay in the transfer of the appellant's RTI application to Bureau of Immigration. However, this was more due to lack of application of mind rather than malafide intention. Hence, in the absence of any malafide intention, it would not be appropriate to initiate any action for imposition of penalty on the respondent. Nonetheless, the Commission counsels the CPIO to be more careful in future so that such lapses do not recur.
13. With the above observations, the appeal is disposed of.
Page 6 of 714. Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
Sd/-
Sudhir Bhargava (सुधीर भागगव) Chief Information Commissioner (मुख्य सूचना आयुक्त) दिनांक / Date 02.12.2019 Authenticated true copy (अनभप्रमानणत सत्यानपत प्रनत) S. S. Rohilla (एस. एस. रोनिल्ला) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26186535 / [email protected] Addresses of the parties:
1. The First Appellate Authority (FAA) Bureau of Immigration (Ministry of Home Affairs), East Block - VIII, Level - V, Sector - 1, R.K.Puram, New Delhi - 110066
2. The Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) Bureau of Immigration (Ministry of Home Affairs), East Block - VIII, Level - V, Sector - 1, R.K.Puram, New Delhi - 110066
3. The First Appellate Authority (FAA) Foreigners Division (Ministry of Home Affairs), Major Dhyan Chand, National Stadium, India Gate Circle, New Delhi - 110001
4. The Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) Foreigners Division (Ministry of Home Affairs), Major Dhyan Chand, National Stadium, India Gate Circle, New Delhi - 110001
5. Shri Harish Kristapati Page 7 of 7