Central Information Commission
V Rajasekaran vs Passport Office on 2 March, 2017
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
2nd Floor, 'B' Wing, August Kranti Bhawan,
Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi -110066
Tel : +91-11-26186535
Appeal No. CIC/KY/A/2016/000542
Appellant: Mr. V. Rajasekaran,
No.4, Casthury Street,
Tahmizthai Nagar,
Vanarapet,
Puducherry-605001.
Respondent: Central Public Information Officer
Regional Passport Officer,
Ministry of External Affairs,
Passport Office,
Saligramam, Chennai,
Tamil Nadu.
Date of Hearing: 1.3.2017
Dated of Decision: 1.3.2017
ORDER
Facts:
1. The appellant filed RTI application dated 23.11.2015 seeking information regarding: movement of his file pertaining to his passport application, status of his passport application, reason for the undue delay in issuing his passport.
2. The appellant filed First Appeal dated 31.12.2015 with First Appellate Authority (FAA). The response of CPIO and FAA is not on record. The appellant filed second appeal on 3.3.2016 before the Commission praying for information sought.
Hearing:
3. The appellant participated in the hearing through video conferencing. The respondent was represented through his counsel in person.
4. The appellant referred to RTI application dated 23.11.2015 and stated that earlier the respondent has not provided any information to him. The appellant said that after receiving Commission's hearing notice, the respondent has sent a reply dated 22.2.2017. He stated that his file has been closed without considering the fact that one balance document that was asked for had also been supplied by him much earlier. In any case, delay in giving information implies loss of Rs.3000/- to him by way of application fees for two passports. The appellant stated that penalty should be imposed on the respondent and compensation should be paid to him.
Discussion/ observation:
5. The respondent agreed that there has been a delay in giving information.
He further agreed that now there is no option for appellant but to apply afresh for passport. The respondent has, therefore, suffered loss by non-supply of information. The respondent should pay compensation of Rs.3000/- to the appellant for not providing the information on time. Decision:
6. The respondent is directed to pay compensation of Rs.3000/- to the appellant within 15 days of this order.
7. The respondent is directed to show cause, within 21 days of this order, why action should not be taken against him for contravening the timelines prescribed in the RTI Act.
The appeal is disposed of. Copy of the order be given to the parties free of cost.
(Radha Krishna Mathur) Chief Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy (S.C. Sharma) Dy. Registrar