Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

Divya Gupta vs Ut Of Jammu And Kashmir on 22 November, 2022

                                के   ीय सूचना आयोग
                       Central Information Commission
                            बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
                       Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                        नई द ली,
                              ली New Delhi - 110067

ि तीय अपील सं या / Second Appeal No. CIC/UTOJK/A/2020/673155

Ms. Divya Gupta                                               ... अपीलकता /Appellant
                                  VERSUS/बनाम

PIO, Block Development Officer, Rajgarh,                ... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Ramban
Through: None

Date of Hearing                      :     08.06.2022
Date of Showcause Hearing            :     02.11.2022
Date of Decision                     :     14.06.2022
Date of Final Decision               :     22.11.2022
Chief Information Commissioner       :     Shri Y. K. Sinha

Relevant facts emerging from appeal:

RTI application filed on              :    20.05.2019
PIO replied on                        :    -
First Appeal filed on                 :    04.07.2019
First Appellate Order on              :    08.08.2019
2ndAppeal/complaint received on       :    09.06.2020
Information sought

and background of the case:

The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 20.05.2019 seeking information on the following point:-

Having not received any response from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 04.07.2019. The Assistant Commissioner (Dev) vide order dated 08.08.2019 directed the Block Development Officer, Rajgarh Ramban to provide desired information to the Appellant free of cost within seven days.

Aggrieved over non compliance of the FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.

Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:

Hearing was scheduled through virtual means after giving prior notice to both the parties. However, only the Appellant attended the hearing through video conference while the Respondent - BDO, Rajgarh, Ramban is absent without communicating any reason for his absence. In fact the Respondent has not even bothered to submit any written submission or documentary evidence to prove compliance of the FAA's order dated 08.08.2019.

Decision:

In the light of the facts discussed hereinabove, no response seems to have been provided to the Appellant by the PIO/BDO, Rajgarh, Ramban nor has he submitted any written submission indicating any attempt to furnish the information sought by the Appellant in compliance with the directions of the FAA or any justification for non furnishing of the same.

Examination of the facts of the case has revealed that the non furnishing of information has not been explained or justified by the PIO/BDO, Rajgarh, Ramban. Hence the Registry of this Bench is hereby directed to issue a SHOW CAUSE NOTICE to the PIO/BDO, Rajgarh, Ramban- Shri Rajesh Sharma to submit an explanation as to why penalty should not be imposed on him for wilful violation of the provisions of the RTI Act by causing deliberate obstruction in the dissemination of information, defying the specific orders of the FAA and vitiating the proceedings held today before the Commission by his unexplained absence. Hearing of the Show Cause case shall be scheduled in the normal course by the Registry and a reply to the Notice must reach the Commission at least one week prior to hearing so scheduled, failing which the reply shall not be taken on record.

Moreover, considering the fact that the instant appeal arose out of non- compliance of the FAA's order dated 08.08.2019, the matter is hereby remanded to the FAA-Shri Zameer Ahmed Rishu, Assistant Commissioner(Development), Ramban to ensure compliance of the order passed by the earlier FAA within three weeks of receipt of this order. The Respondent shall submit a compliance report before the Commission in this regard with necessary proof of service by 15.07.2022, failing which appropriate penal action shall be initiated as per provisions of law.

The appeal is disposed off on the above terms.

Facts emerging in Course of Show Cause Hearing: 02.11.2022 A written submission has been received from the BDO, Rajgarh in the form of an undated letter which does not bear the name of the signatory. Contents of the said communication are as under:

Hearing was scheduled through virtual means after giving prior notice to the parties. Noticee was present for the hearing held through video conference and reiterated the contentions as noted above.

Final Decision: 21.11.2022 Upon examination of the facts it is noted that the response received from the Noticee is inadequate and deficient on multiple counts. The following points have emerged in this case:

i). No response was provided to the Appellant by the PIO/BDO, /BDO, Rajgarh, Ramban,, when the RTI application was filed;

ii). No document indicating compliance of the FAA's order dated 08.08.2019;

08.08.2019

iii). The PIO/BDO, Rajgarh, Ramban has not bothered to explain or justify non furnishing of information, in violation of the provisions o off the RTI Act;

Act

iv). The Noticee has not submitted any explanationnation for his absence from the hearing held on 08.06.2022, though by his own admission he held the post between 02.03.2022 to 30.06.2022;

v). The Noticee mentioned in his undated and unsigned submission that a copy of reply sent to the Appellant is annexed with the submission, but no such document is found on record;

vi) There is no document which indicates compliance of the Commission's last la order dated 14.06.2022.

The Commission had granted time and opportunity to the Noticee even during hearing of the Show Cause, but the Noticee has not been able to justify the aforementioned lapses and most importantly the denial of information by him. In fact the Noticee has failed to explain his conduct of deliberate and wilful obstruction in the dissemination and has displayed a rather callous attitude and put forward untenable arguments arguments.

The Commission does not find force in the averments of the NoticeeN and the unexplained lapse on the part of the Respondent Respondent,, despite ample opportunity, leading to violation of provisions of the Act can not be excused.

In the light of the above discussion, the Commission holds the Noticee - the then PIO/BDO, Rajgarh, Ramban- Shri Rajesh Sharma responsible for causing deliberate and malafide obstruction to the dissemination of information. He has failed to provide any reasonable cause for such denial of information before the Commission, despite being granted adequate opportunity. Hence, penalty of Rs. 15,000/- is imposed on the Noticee, Shri Rajesh Sharma, the then PIO- PIO/BDO, Rajgarh, Ramban under Section 20 of the RTI Act, for violation of provisions of the RTI Act by denying the supply of information without any reasonable cause.

Y. K. Sinha (वाई.

वाई. के . िस हा) Chief Information Commissioner (मु य सूचना आयु ) As per the decision of Commission of even date, in exercise of powers vested under Section 20(1) of the RTI Act, 2005 penalty/s of Rupees Fifteen Thousand is being imposed on the Noticee, Shri Rajesh Sharma, the then PIO/BDO, Rajgarh, Ramban which should be paid in three equal instalments of Rupees Five Thousand each. The first instalment of the aforesaid penalty should reach the Commission by 15.12.2022 and the last instalment of penalty should reach the Commission by 15.02.2023. The penalty imposed should be remitted through Demand Draft or a Banker's Cheque drawn in favour of the Pay & Accounts Officer, CAT, payable at New Delhi and the same should be sent to Shri Rahul Rastogi, Joint Secretary (Admn.), Central Information Commission, Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka, New Delhi - 110067.

Y. K. Sinha (वाई.

वाई. के . िस हा) Chief Information Commissioner (मु य सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स ािपत ित) S. K. Chitkara (एस. के . िचटकारा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26186535 Page 4 of 4