Central Information Commission
D Shekhar vs Ut Of Andaman & Nicobar on 9 April, 2021
Author: Uday Mahurkar
Bench: Uday Mahurkar
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 / शिकायत संख्या / Complaint No (s).:-
CIC/UTOAN/A/2020/112836-UM +
CIC/UTOAN/C/2019/157044-UM
Mr. D. Shekhar,
....अपीलकताग/Appellant
.... निकायतकताग /Complainant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO,
Office of the Assistant Commissioner,
South Andaman, Port Blair, UT of A&N Island-744101
प्रनतवािीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 08.04.2021
Date of Decision : 09.04.2021
ORDER
RTI I: File No. CIC/UTOAN/A/2020/112836-UM Date of RTI application 10.10.2019 CPIO's response Not on Record Date of the First Appeal 14.11.2019 First Appellate Authority's response Not on Record Date of diarized receipt of Appeal by the Commission 19.03.2020 FACTS The Appellant vide his RTI application sought information on 11 points:
1. List of the Quarry owner of South Andaman Island Page 1 of 3
2. Name of the department concerned fixing the rate of quarry product.
3. Name of the department concerned fixing the rate of River sand.
4. Copy of royalty paid by the quarry owner in the concerned department for a period of six months and other issues related thereto.
The PIO/AC(S), vide letter dated 05.12.2019 provided a point-wise available information to the Appellant and for points 05, 06, 07, 10 and 11, the application was transferred to the concerned PIO. Dissatisfied with the reply received from the PIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal, which was not adjudicated by the First Appellate Authority. Thereafter, the Appellant filed a Second Appeal before the Commission with a request to provide correct and complete information.
RTI II: File No. CIC/UTOAN/C/2019/157044-UM Date of RTI application 10.10.2019 CPIO's response Not on Record Date of the First Appeal Not on Record First Appellate Authority's response Not on Record Date of diarized receipt of Complaint by the Commission 27.11.2019 FACTS
The Complainant vide his RTI application sought information on 11 points:
1. List of the Quarry owner of South Andaman Island
2. Name of the department concerned fixing the rate of quarry product.
3. Name of the department concerned fixing the rate of River sand.
4. Copy of royalty paid by the quarry owner in the concerned department for a period of six months and other issues related thereto.
Dissatisfied due to non-receipt of any response from the CPIO, the Complainant approached the Commission with a request to take action under section 20 of RTI Act.
HEARING:
Facts emerging during the hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant / Complainant: Absent;
Respondent: Mr. Jose K. John, Surveyor and drafts man, through VC;
The Appellant / Complainant remained absent during the hearing. Ms. Kalyani, Network Engineer NIC studio at Port Blair, confirmed the absence of the Appellant / Complainant. The Commission Page 2 of 3 was however, under intimation by the Applicant that he would be unable to attend the hearing due to personal reasons. In its reply, the Respondent present during the hearing submitted that the available information has already been furnished to the Appellant / Complainant. As regards the pending information sought on points 05, 06, 07, 10 and 11 of the RTI application, the Respondent submitted that he will coordinate with the concerned PIO for furnishing the same to the Appellant / Complainant.
The Appellant / Complainant was not present to substantiate his claims regarding malafide denial of information by the Respondent or for withholding it without any reasonable cause.
DECISION:
Keeping in view the facts of the case and the submissions made by the Respondent, the Commission is of the view that the CPIO cannot function merely as "post offices" but instead are responsible to ensure that the information sought under the RTI Act is provided. Therefore, the Commission directs the CPIO to coordinate with the concerned PIO, TPB for obtaining the information sought on the remaining points of the RTI application and furnish the same to the Appellant / Complainant, as held and available on their record, within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.
The Commission further directs the Appellant / Complainant that while addressing RTI Applications he will be very precise as to whom to address the said Application because Applications addressed to the wrong Public Authority are resulting in waste of time and energy of the Administration and also late reply to the Appellant / Complainant. The Commission would want strict compliance of this directive on the part of the Appellant / Complainant henceforth.
The Appeal / Complaint stands disposed accordingly.
(Uday Mahurkar) (उिय माहूरकर) (Information Commissioner) (सूचना आयुक्त) Authenticated true copy (अभिप्रमाणित एवं सत्यापित प्रतत) (R. K. Rao) (आर. के. राव) (Dy. Registrar) (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26182598 / [email protected] दिनांक / Date: 09.04.2021 Page 3 of 3