Central Information Commission
Mr.Puran Chand Choudhary vs Government Of Nct Of Delhi on 6 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/2010/003150/10307
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/003150
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Mr. Puran Chand Choudhary
B-877, Mahawar Nagar, Kotla Mubrakpur,
New Delhi-110003
Respondent : PIO/DDE (South)
C-Block, Defence Colony,
New Delhi-24
RTI application filed on : 22/06/2010
PIO replied : No reply
First appeal filed on : 07/08/2010
First Appellate Authority order : 03/09/2010
Second Appeal received on : 09/112010
Information sought:
Information with regard to Sanwal Das Memorial School, KMP, New Delhi-3
1. A copy of budget estimate of receipt and payment of ensuing year 2005-06.
2. A copy of audited balance sheet for the year 2004.05.
3. A copy of audited receipt and payment accounts for the year 2004-05.
4. A copy of audited Income and Expenditure accounts for the year 2004-05.
5. A copy of student statement as 30.04.2005.
6. A copy of certificate regarding pattern of concession of fee.
7. A copy of Staff statement as on 31.07.2005.
8. A copy of Schedule of fees and funds the year 2005-06.
9. A copy of statement showing the dates of disbursement of salaries during the year 2004-05.
10. A copy of Form-16 (Form Sixteen) issued to all the staff members of the school. Supply copies in respect of Principal, Vice-Principal and Teachers.
11. A copy of the order issued for implementation of the 6th pay commission to the management of school.
12. It is a fact that Provident Fund is being deducted from the salaries of all the staff members of the school. Supply me the information whether the PF is being deducted and deposited with PF Department on the basis of salaries shown under the head "Salaries Account" shown in the income & expenditure account/receipt and payment accounts for years ending 31st March, 2006, 07, 08, 09 in respect of the school.
13. What is the name of DDO (Drawing and Disbursement Officer) in the said school?
Reply of the PIO:
No reply was given by the PIO.
Grounds for the First Appeal:
The PIO did not reply even after the lapse of 30 days.
Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
The Appellant is present. P10/DDE (South) and E.O.Zone-24 are also present. The appellant vide his 1st Appeal dated 09.08.2010 has complained that he has not received any information from PIO/DDE(South) in response to his RTI application dated 25.06.2010. DDE/PIO(South) informed that the information is available with her and she has provided the same on the spot but the appellant was not satisfied with the information provided by the PI0/DDE(South). DDE/PIO(South) is directed to provide the correct and complete information as required by the appellant within 15 days free of cost.
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
Non compliance of FAA's order by the PIO.
Decision:
The appellant states that no information was provided to him by the PIO inspite of the categorical order of the FAA. The PIO has not claimed any exemption under Section 8 (1) of the RTI application, hence it appears to be a denial of information without any reasons.
The Appeal is allowed.
The PIO is directed to provide the complete information as per the records to the appellant before 25 December 2010.
From the facts before the Commission it appears that the PIO is 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. 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 30 December, 2010. 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 6 December 2010 (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (VMK)