Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

Mr.Ranjan Sharma vs Directorate Of Education, Gnct, Delhi on 13 December, 2010

                CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                    Club Building (Near Post Office)
                  Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
                         Tel: +91-11-26161796

                                      Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2010/003273/10406
                                              Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/003273
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal

Appellant                           :      Mr. Ranjan Sharma,
                                           82 Arsh Complex,
                                           Alfa-1, Greater Noida,
                                           Dist.-Gautam Budhha Nagar,
                                           U.P.

Respondent                          :      Public Information Officer/DDE(S),

Directorate of Education, Government of NCT of Delhi, Room No. 2, Ground Floor, C-Block, Defence Colony, New Delhi RTI application filed on : 07/09/2010 PIO replied : 05/10/2010 First appeal filed on : 27/10/2010 First Appellate Authority order : 03/11/2010 Second Appeal received on : 22/11/2010 Information Sought:

The appellant sought information regarding the Sr. Information Sought Reply of PIO No.

1. To provide with a Certified Copy of The said complaint was received by progress report of the enclosed DDE on 03/08/2010 and in Zone 23 on complaint. Also provide with the details 07/08/2010. The proceedings are still in of such complaint as to which officer it progress.

was sent to, the time-period the complaint was with the officer, the action taken by the officer till date.

2. Specify whether the enquiry on the The enquiry of the complaint is still in enclosed complaint is completed. process.

3. Specify if the enquiry is completed in Not applicable in the view of above.

above-mentioned complaint, then the action taken against the erring Officials.

4. Specify the name/names of the persons Not applicable in the view of above.

found responsible for the mentioned complaint.

5. Specify the time required to complete The questions related to future are not the enquiry if it has not been finished. covered under RTI Act.

First Appeal:

Incomplete and incorrect information provided by PIO.

Order of the FAA:

"The Appellant is present. P10/DDE (South) is also present. The appellant vide his 1st Appeal dated 11.10.2010 has complained that he has not received any information from PIO/DDE(South) in response to his RTI application dated 07.09.2010 submitted in the office of PIO/DDE(South) on 08/09/2010.

P10/DDE (South) informed that information has already been provided to the appellant on 05/10/2010 but the appellant said he has yet not received any information from DDE/PIO(South) till date. P10/DDE (South) provided the information on the spot and appellant accepted having received the information and also accepted to be satisfactory except S.No. 01.

PI0/DDE (South) is directed to -provide the correct and complete information as required by the-appellant-in-his-above RTI application for point no.01 within 07 days free of cost."

Ground of the Second Appeal:

No information provided by PIO after the order of the FAA and directions of FAA are not followed.

Decision:

The appellant states that no information was provided to him by the PIO as per the order of the FAA. The FAA had clearly ordered that correct and complete information was to be provided by the PIO on point 1. The Appeal is allowed.

The PIO is directed to provide the correct and complete action taken on the complaint in the following format to the appellant before 30 December 2010:

                                  Action taken
Date on which       Name and designation Action              Date on which forwarded
Complaint           of                        taken          to
received            The officer receiving it.                Next officer/office.

*there will be as many rows as the number of officers who handled the complaint. Attested photocopies of all letters and notings will be provided.

From the facts before the Commission it appears that the PIO is guilty of not furnishing complete information within 30 days, as per the requirement of the RTI Act. He has further refused to obey the orders of his superior officer, which raises a reasonable doubt that the denial of information may also be malafide. The First Appellate Authority has clearly ordered the information to be given. It appears that the PIO's actions attract the penal provisions of Section 20 (1). A showcause notice is being issued to him, and he is directed give his reasons to the Commission to show cause why penalty should not be levied on him.

He will give his written submissions showing cause why penalty should not be imposed on him as mandated under Section 20 (1) before 5 January, 2011. He will also send 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.

This decision is announced in open chamber.

Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties. Any information in compliance with this Order will be provided free of cost as per Section 7(6) of RTI Act.

Shailesh Gandhi Information Commissioner 13 December 2010 (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (PBR) Page 3 of 3