Central Information Commission
Bhaiyya Mahadeo Ramteke vs Election Commission Of India on 14 February, 2019
के न्द्रीयसूचनाआयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबागंगनाथमागग,मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नईदिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
नितीय अपील संख्या / Second Appeal No. CIC/ECOMM/A/2018/142323
Bhaiyya Mahadeo Ramteke ... अपीलकताग/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO, Election Commission of ...प्रनतवािीगण /Respondents
India, New Delhi.
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:
RTI : 15.05.2018 FA : 11.06.2018 SA : 02.07.2018
CPIO : 28.05.2018 FAO : 25.06.2018 Hearing : 11.02.2019
ORDER
1. The appellant filed an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Election Commission of India, New Delhi seeking information on two points, including, inter-alia, (i) the total no. of votes polled in the General Elections for Lok Sabha in 2014 and Legislative Assemblies of 19 states by EVMs only as mentioned in the RTI application from 16.05.2014 to 15.05.2018, and (ii) the total no. of votes Page 1 of 5 polled in favor of all candidates of Bhartiya Janata Party (BJP) in the General Elections for Lok Sabha in 2014 and Legislative Assemblies of 19 states by EVMs only as mentioned in the RTI application from 16.05.2014 to 15.05.2018.
2. The appellant filed a second appeal before the Commission on the grounds that the CPIO has not provided the desired information to him and incorrectly stated that the same is voluminous. The appellant requested the Commission to direct the CPIO to provide the desired information to him.
Hearing:
3. The appellant Shri Bhaiyya Mahadeo Ramteke attended the hearing through video-conferencing. The respondent Smt. Poonam Sarang, Under Secretary and Shri R.K. Keshari, ASO, Election Commission of India, New Delhi were present in person.
4. The appellant submitted that the CPIO has not provided the desired information to him and incorrectly stated that the same can be accessed on the website of ECI. He added that he has only sought the grand total number of votes polled through EVM during the general elections and in various State Legislative Assemblies from May 2014 to May 2018 and those in favor of the political party, BJP, which is not available on the website of the respondent authority.
5. The respondent submitted that the appellant has been informed vide reply dated 28.05.2018 that the data/information sought by him is not readily available in a compiled format and runs into thousands of pages, collating and compiling of which would disproportionately divert the resources of the respondent Page 2 of 5 organization. However, the desired information along with the figures is available in public domain, i.e., on ECI's website and the link to access the same has also been provided to the appellant. Moreover, as per the provisions of the RTI Act, it is not the task of the CPIO to collect the data for the appellant and arrive at/calculate the figures.
Decision:
6. The Commission, after hearing the submissions of both the parties and perusing the records, agrees with the submissions of the respondent. The Commission finds that all the information sought by the appellant relating to the total no. of votes polled through EVMs during general election of Lok Sabha and in various State Legislative Assemblies from May 2014 to May 2018 as well as those in favor of the political party, BJP, is available on the website of Election Commission of India. The RTI Act mandates every public authority to provide as much information to the public including through internet so that the public have minimum resort to the use of the RTI Act to obtain information. Further, once information has been provided in public domain and on the website, the information is no longer held by or under the control of any public authority and hence, is no longer accessible as 'right to information'. The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in Registrar of Companies & Ors vs. Dharemendra Kumar Garg & Ors [W.P.(C) 11271/2009], decided on 01.06.2012 has held as under:
"9. It shall be interesting to examine this proposition. Section 2(j) of the RTI Act speaks of "the right to information accessible under this Act which is held by or under the control of any public authority". This should mean Page 3 of 5 that unless an information is exclusively held and controlled by a public authority, that information cannot be said to be an information accessible under the RTI Act. Inferentially it would mean that once a certain information is placed in the public domain accessible to the citizens either freely, or on payment of a pre-determined price, that information cannot be said to be 'held' or 'under the control of' the public authority and, thus would cease to be an information accessible under the RTI Act."
7. Further, in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of The Registrar Supreme Court of India v. Commodore Lokesh K. Batra & Ors. LPA 24/2015 & CM No. 965/2015, the respondent cannot be asked to collate information in the manner in which it is sought by the appellant. Thus, the action of the CPIO is in consonance with the RTI Act.
8. With the above observations, the appeal is disposed of.
9. Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
Sd/-
Sudhir Bhargava (सुधीर भागगव) Chief Information Commissioner (मुख्य सूचना आयुक्त) दिनांक / Date 12.02.2019 Authenticated true copy (अनभप्रमानणत सत्यानपत प्रनत) S. S. Rohilla (एस. एस. रोनिल्ला) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26186535 / [email protected] Page 4 of 5 Addresses of the parties:
1. The Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Election Commission of India 3rd Floor, Nirvachan Sadan Ashoka Road, New Delhi- 110001.
2. Shri Bhaiyya Mahadeo Ramteke Page 5 of 5