Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Mr.R K Mahajan vs Cbdt on 24 December, 2012

                    CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                        Club Building (Near Post Office)
                    Old JNU Campus, New Delhi-110067
                             Tel: +91-11-26105682


                     File No.CIC/DS/A/2011/001932/RM




Appellant:                              Mr. R.K. Mahajan, Kapurthala


Public Authority:                       Income Tax Deptt., Jalandhar


Date of Hearing:                        01.08.2012


Date of decision:                       24.12.12



Heard on 01.08.2012.


Appellant is present.


The Public Authority is absent.


The above were heard and records perused.


FACTS


      Vide RTI dated 11.1.11, appellant has sought certain information.

                                       1
 2.     The CPIO vide letter dated 11.2.11 informed the appellant that the
required documents were being traced out and shall be supplied. The
appellant vide his letter dated 14.2.11 reiterated his request on the
following three issues:-


     a)   Whether original letters at Sl. No. 1 to 8 of RTI along with file notings
          etc. have been misplaced, destroyed or removed from the office of
          CIT Jalandhar-II.


     b)   Whether any enquiry has been ordered on the loss of documents and
          officials responsible.


     c)   Similar information in r/o the original documents mentioned at Sl. No.
          1 to 6 of RTI.


3.        An appeal was filed on 21.2.11.


4.    AA vide order dated 21. 3.11 observed that the order of the CPIO is
not in conformity with the provisions of the RTI Act and directed the CPIO
to supply the information as per the provisions of the Act.


5.        Not satisfied with the response, he filed the present appeal.


6.   The appellant submitted that he has not received any response from
the CPIO in pursuance of AA's order dated 21.3.11.


7.        As the public authority is absent, the hearing is adjourned.


ORDER
2

Three appeals have been filed by Shri R.K.Mahajan, which have been registered with CIC with following numbers:

   i.     CIC/DS/A/2011/001932/RM
   ii.    CIC/DS/A/2011/002031/RM
   iii.   CIC/DS/A/2011/002085/RM


All the above three cases were listed for hearing on 1.8.12. In the first case, the public authority did not attend. In the other two cases, Shri Ved Pal Singh, Asstt Commissioner, IT(HQ) representing the AA, and Shri Dharam Chand, Jt Commissioner & CPIO, attended the hearing.

The Commission notes with concern that the representatives of the public authority were not able to provide any satisfactory reply in respect of case no. ii and iii, while case no.i remained unrepresented.

The Commission directs the Commissioner of IT, Jalandhar-II, Jalandhar to probe into the matter and ascertain the reasons for such casual approach to RTI applications.

The Commission further directs CPIO Shri Hutesh Dogra, Deputy CIT(HQ), office of CIT Jalandhar-II to personally appear before the Commission on 4.9.12 along with a point wise reply to the RTI application dt 12.1.11 (case no.002031) and RTI application dt 11.1.11 (case no.001932). He should also bring all original papers for the Commission's perusal. CPIO should also submit his written submissions as to why penalty proceedings should not be initiated u/s 20 of the RTI Act against him. The Commission also directs CPIO Smt Shalini B.Kaushal, Addl CIT range-IV Jalandhar to appear in person on 4.9.12 along with original papers relating to RTI application dt 11.1.11 (case no.002085) and a point wise reply to the RTI application.

Sd/-

(Rajiv Mathur) 3 Central Information Commissioner 27.9.2012 Appellant present.

The public authority is represented by Shri Satish Kumar, Jt.Commissioner, IT, Range-IV, Jalandhar/ CPIO and Shri Ved Pal Singh, Asstt. Commissioner, IT(Hqrs), O/o. Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar, representing the AA.

The appellant has made a written submission, which is taken on record. It is his contention that there has been no compliance of the orders of the AA dt. 21.3.11 wherein the CPIO was directed to decide the application in accordance with the provisions of the RTI Act.

2. The public authority was unable to provide any satisfactory response as to whether any reply has been sent in furtherance of the AA order and requested ten days time to provide a written submission to the Commission.

Sd/-

(Rajiv Mathur) Central Information Commissioner 21.11.2012 Written submissions dt. 19.11.2012 of Shri Satish Kumar Sharma,Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-IV, Jalandhar/CPIO is received. He has submitted that as the matter pertains to Asstt. Commissioner of IT(Hqrs), O/o. Commissioner, Income Tax, Jalandhar-II, he has been requested to furnish the same.

4

2. The Commission directs Shri Ved Pal Singh, Asstt. Commissioner, IT HQ, O/O Commissioner of IT, Jalandhar II, to submit the following:

a) whether the orders of the AA dt 21.3.11 have been complied with. If so, a copy of the same be sent to the Commission.
b) if not, a reply be sent to the appellant with a copy to the Commission.
c) the date on which the earlier CPIO Shri Hutesh Dogra, Dy Commissioner, IT HQ, demitted office.

3. A final decision will be taken on receipt of the above information. Your response to the above three queries should reach the Commission within fifteen days of receipt of this order.

Sd/-

(Rajiv Mathur) Central Information Commissioner 24.12.12 The Commission is in receipt of letter dt 13.12.12 from Shri Vedpal Singh, Assistant Commissioner of IT(HQ)/CPIO CIT Jalandhar.

2. The Commission observes that the response to the appellant, in compliance of the orders dt 21.3.11 of Shri Rakesh Suri, Commissioner of IT, Jalandhar-II/AA, is yet to be sent.

3. The AA has specified in his orders to supply information to the RTI query, point IV(i to iii) if liable to be supplied under the RTI Act.

5

DECISION The Commission directs the CPIO to provide a specific, point wise response to the appellant as mentioned in AA's order dt 21.3.11.

A show cause notice be issued to Shri Ved Pal Singh, Asstt Commissioner, IT(HQ)/CPIO as to why penalty proceedings u/s 20(1) should not be initiated against him, for not giving a response to the appellant on the points mentioned above, inspite of the Commission's order dt 21.11.12.

CPIO should comply with the above, within three weeks of receipt of this order.

The appeal is disposed of.

Sd/-

(Rajiv Mathur) Central Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy forwarded to :

Shri R.K. Mahajan, 16, Gopal Park, Charbatti Chowk, Kapurthala (Punjab) The Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax & CPIO, O/O Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar - II, Jalandhar (Punjab) 6 The Commissioner of Income Tax & AA, O/O Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar - II, Jalandhar (Punjab) (Raghubir Singh) Deputy Registrar .11.2012 7