Central Information Commission
P S Agrawal vs Ut Of Chandigarh on 18 June, 2020
के य सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मु नरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
File No : CIC/UTOCH/C/2018/156803
P S Agarwal .... शकायतकता /Complainant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO,
O/o Registrar Cooperative Societies
1st Floor, Govt. Press Building
Sector-18, U.T. Chandigarh ... तवाद गण /Respondent
RTI application filed on : 26/11/2016
CPIO replied on : 20/12/2016
First appeal filed on : 09/02/2017
First Appellate Authority : 22/02/2017
order
Complaint dated : 25/09/2017
Date of Hearing : 15/06/2020
Date of Decision : 15/06/2020
सूचना आयु : द काश स हा
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : DIVYA PRAKASH SINHA
Information sought:
The Complainant sought information through 4 points pertaining to payment made by the GPA holders of House No. 541, 542, 544 etc. to the management of CSIO Society, including inter alia, details of said payment, copy of action taken report on his application dated 20.07.2016 along with all the correspondence(s)/notesheet(s) prepared thereof etc. Grounds for the Complaint:1
The CPIO has not provided the information in the tabular form desired by him.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Complainant: Present on phone.
Respondent: Krishan Kumar, Asstt. Registrar & CPIO, The ARCS, Co- operative Societies, U.T. Chandigarh present through VC.
Complainant urged for relief to be ordered in the matter and submitted on the lines of his written submission dated 12.06.2020 received in the Commission before hearing. It has been alleged therein that the President of CSIO Society has demanded illegal money from the Complainant for transfer of ownership of the house in his name. That, upon bringing the matter to the notice of Additional Registrar of Cooperative Societies (ARCS), an investigation was ordered without involving him at any stage of the investigation, so he believes a wrong report was submitted by the then Inspector of Cooperative Societies. That, he again approached the ARCS with some facts and requested for authentication of the facts and a fair investigation by a senior officer. Subsequent to which, ARCS called upon the President of CSIO Society as well as the Complainant to submit papers related to the case. That, later in his computerised report, the ARCS has shown the data of individual house owners (as the names are mentioned in RTI application) given by President, CSIO Society in tabulated form while the actual investigated data and the data given by him have not been shown in tabulated form in the computerized report. Complainant insists that the reason to not provide the information in tabulated form is to hide the comparison and to hide the connivance of the Society and the then Inspector of Cooperative Societies. In this context, Complainant has prayed for directions to be ordered to provide the existing data in tabulated form as sought in the RTI Application in order to help him compare with the data of the CSIO society.
CPIO submitted that information in available form was ready to be provided to the Complainant upon payment of additional fees, but since Complainant has not paid the fees till date, no further action could be taken in the matter. He further submitted that he will abide by the orders of the Commission.
2File No : CIC/UTOCH/C/2018/156803 Decision Commission based on the nature of relief sought by the Complainant during hearing, treats the instant matter as Second Appeal.
In view of the contentions of the Complainant, Commission observes that he is requesting for information to be provided in a certain form in which it does not exist. Although, from the perusal of facts on record, the data as sought by the Complainant does not appear voluminous per se, so as to cause disproportionate diversion of resources of the public authority. However, considering the contentious scheme of things narrated by the Complainant, Commission deems it expedient to offer inspection of those records based on which the averred computerized data has been created by the Respondent office alongwith the alleged actual investigated data and the data given by Complainant. Complainant can take the copies of the record containing the relevant data and compare it himself so as to avert any further instance of aspersions and apprehensions that may arise from the tabulated data the CPIO may create. It will not be out of place here to note that since it involves creation of data regarding payments and calculations manually, scope for human error cannot be averted.
Accordingly, Commission directs the CPIO to offer an adequate opportunity of inspection of all relevant records (in the form it is available in) pertaining to the data sought at para 1 & 2 and information sought at para 3 of the RTI Application to the Complainant on a mutually decided date and time duly intimated to him telephonically and in writing. Copy of documents limited to 20 pages, if desired, should be provided to the Complainant without charging prescribed fees and for pages beyond this limit prescribed fees shall be charged as per Rule 4 of RTI Rules, 2012. The said direction should be complied within 15 days of receipt of this order and a compliance report to this effect be duly sent to the Commission by the CPIO enumerating the details of documents inspected and copy of documents provided to the Complainant.
3The Complaint is disposed of accordingly.
Divya Prakash Sinha ( द काश स हा )
Information Commissioner ( सूचना आयु )
Authenticated true copy
(अ भ मा णत स या पत त)
Haro Prasad Sen
Dy. Registrar
011-26106140 / [email protected]
हरो साद सेन, उप-पंजीयक
दनांक / Date
4