Central Information Commission
Mr. Prasanta Basu Ray vs Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited on 20 May, 2013
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26101592
File No. CIC/BS/A/2012/000688/2525
20 May 2013
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Prasanta Basu Ray
A/1/4 Deziray Complex,
Barabazar, Chandannagar,
District: Hooghly-712136
Respondent : APIO & AGM(PR & Commercial)
BSNL
Calcutta Telephones
Telephone Bhawan, Ground Floor,
34, BBD BAG(S), Kolkata-700001
RTI application filed on : 09/01/2012
PIO replied on : 30/01/2012
First appeal filed on : 01/03/2012
First Appellate Authority order : Not mentioned.
Second Appeal received on : 08/05/2012
Information sought:
"Since 24/12/2011 my service is being frequently interrupted. A complaint vide Dkt number- 1196620852 was lodged. But without taking any feedback from the undersigned customer about the improvement of service the dkt was surprisingly cleared. Another complaint was lodged vide Dkt no.11213701742 dt.04.014.2012 for same reason of severe interruption of BB Service. But of no avail. Again today's complaint appears to be another new number dkt-11220582082. Problem has been continuing with no indication of any improvement in near future. In this connection I request following information:
1) Please furnish the full name, designation and address of the officer who is directly responsible for looking after my BB Service.
2) The reason for no information about the nature of fault for more than fifteen days.
3) The nature of fault and progress. The area where the fault is found. Name and address of the officer who was responsible to directly looking after the fault.
4) Although my BB service has been suffering from acute disturbance for last fortnight I fail to understand how the Dkt number are cleared. Please intimate the system/guideline etc in place which is to be strictly followed to write off the complaint/Dkt number of the customers in connection with BB service.
5) Previously plethora of written complaints to SDE/Lichutala chandannagar, PRO/Serampore for grievance against non availability of BB service have been blatantly ignored. Please intimate whether any system in BSN: is in place to strictly acknowledge the grievance and intimate the status of the complaint to the customer.
6) The tentative date of normal resumption of BB service.Page 1 of 2
7) Full name and address of First appellate Authority.
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
The desired information has not been given.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present Appellant: Mr. Prasanta Basu Ray through VC Respondent: Mr. G Bhabuk CPIO's representative through VC M: 9432001029 The appellant stated that he wants the following information:
(i) The name of the lineman/SDE looking after his broadband.
(ii) The nature of fault which remained for 15 days.
(iii) The progress in repairing and the place where the fault was found.
The appellant further stated that in response to query 4 the CPIO had informed him that the modem needs to be changed whereas another officer intimated him that the problem lay in the server and added that it was only on 14 August 2012 that the PRO wrote to him about the modem problem which he immediately got replaced. He added that he had to face harassment while pursuing his RTI application. The CPIO's representative stated that he will provide the above information to the appellant and also permit him to inspect the relevant files/records for taking whatever further information he needs.
Decision notice:
The Commission directs the CPIO to furnish the information as above to the appellant within 7 days from the date of receipt of this order. The appellant, in case he so desires, should also be permitted to inspect the records and take photocopies/extracts therefrom, free of cost, up to 20 pages.
The CPIO, who received the appellant's RTI application, is warned to exercise due care to ensure that the correct and complete information is furnished timely to the RTI applicant(s) as per provisions of the Act failing which penal proceedings under Section 20 may be initiated in future.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties. In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.
BASANT SETH Information Commissioner Page 2 of 2