Central Information Commission
Shri Rakesh Agarwal vs Dy. Commissioner Of Police (Dcp) Hqrs. on 5 March, 2009
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Appeal No.CIC/WB/A/2007/00871 & 872 both dated 19.8.2007
Right to Information Act 2005 - Section 19
Appellant - Shri Rakesh Agarwal
Respondent - Dy. Commissioner of Police (DCP) Hqrs.
Facts:
These are two appeals received from Shri Rakesh Agarwal of Connaught Lane, New Delhi, as follows:
FILE NO. CIC/WB/A/2007/00871 In this case by a request of 20.4.07 Shri Rakesh Agarwal had sought information on 14 questions from Addl. Commissioner of Police (Traffic), Police Hqrs. to which he has received a pointwise reply on 25.5.07. Against this he had gone on first appeal before Addl Commissioner of Police (Traffic), against which he received orders on 29.6.07. He has moved his second appeal before us with the following prayer:
"1. The respondent be directed to provide complete and comprehensive information free of cost in one batch immediately.
2. Penalty be imposed on Respondent No. 2 under sec.
20(1) of the Act for the delay in supplying the information, for not complying with the directions of Respondent No. 2 and for denying information in a malafide manner."
In this case, notice for hearing was issued to Appellate Authority Shri M. S. Upadhye, JCP Traffic, Police Hqrs. and to the PIO DCP (Traffic). Both notices have returned with the following remarks:
1. "No for Police Hqrs. - wrong address"
2. "Not in Police Hqrs. - wrong address"1
Consequently, the Traffic Department remained unrepresented in the hearing.
File No. CIC/WB/A/2007/00872 In this case by a request of 10.4.07 addressed to Addl. Commissioner of Police (Gen. Admn) Police Hqrs. Shri Rakesh Agarwal had sought the following information:
"This request for information concerns applications for badges by the auto rickshaw drivers (Public Service Vehicles) submitted with the Transport Department of Delhi since January, 2003.
1. How long does the process verification take for a badge from the moment you receive a request from the Transport Department to the day you dispatch your report back to them?
2. Provide information about every request for verification received by you from the Transport Department in the following format since 2003 :
Applicati Tpt Applicant Dt. Concern Current Dt report on date Dept's 's name When ed PS status: sent (if for ref. request Okayed, sent) badge No recd. Rejected, By you pending.
3. In case verification is pending beyond 15 days from the date of receipt of request by you or the number of days specified by you in response to query No. 1, please provide the following information:
a. provide specific reasons for the delay together with documentary evidence.
b. specify which officer / employee did what and on what day on the matter.
c. Provide copies of relevant portions of dispatch & receipt registers to support the above.
d. Name and designation of the persons(s) responsible for delay.
e. Action that you will take against that person(s) for the delay and dereliction in duty.
f. What compensation will you offer to the applicant for causing him delay, harassment and challans on account of driving without a badge?
g. By when will you dispatch a report to the Transport Department now?"2
This application was transferred on 12.4.07 by Shri Deepender Pathak PIO, P.H.Q. & Addl. Commissioner of Police (Gen. Admn) to the Dy. Commissioner of Police (Crime & Railways) with the following remarks:
"The requisite information appears to fall under your jurisdiction. In case it does not fall under your jurisdiction it may please be further transferred to the Public authority to which the subject matter is closely connected, directly under intimation to the applicant."
Consequently the PIO (Crime) in his letter of 17.4.07 transferred the application further to the following:
1. The Dy. Commissioner of Police (PIO) South Distt., PS Hauz Khas, New Delhi.
2. The Dy. Commissioner of Police (PIO) West Distt., PS Rajouri Garden, Delhi
3. The Dy. Commissioner of Police (PIO) South West Distt., PS Vasant Vihar
4. The Dy. Commissioner of Police (PIO) North Distt., Behind PS Civil Lines, Delhi
5. The Dy. Commissioner of Police (PIO) Central Distt., PS Darya Ganj, Delhi
6. The Dy. Commissioner of Police (PIO) East Distt., PS Vishwas Nagar, Delhi
7. The Dy. Commissioner of Police (PIO) North East Distt., PS Seelam Pur, Delhi.
8. The Dy. Commissioner of Police (PIO) New Delhi Distt., PS Parliament Street, Delhi.
9. The Dy. Commissioner of Police (PIO) North West Distt., PS Ashok Vihar, Delhi
10. The Dy. Commissioner of Police (PIO) IGI Airport, Domestic Airport, Delhi."
As a result Shri Rakesh Agarwal received a plethora of responses as follows:
31. Response dated 29.4.07 from Shri Jaspal Singh PIO / DCP (NE), as follows a. The verification process depends upon various factors, however, it takes generally 15 to 30 days.
b. Detail from 1.1.03 to 22.3.07 is enclosed herewith. c. Nil, in view of point No. 1 above."
2. Response of 1.5.07 from Shri R.S. Sagar, APIO (Operation Cell) North East Distt., as follows:
"the reply on your application dated 18.4.07 is ready to be delivered."
3. Response of 3.5.07 from Shri Naresh Kumar, DCP IGI Airport, as follows:
"a. If person is available at his residence, the verification report sent back to Transport Authority immediately.
h. List enclosed.
i. No application remained pending above 15 days."
4. Response of 8.5.07 from Shri D.C. Srivastav, PIO (North Distt.), as follows:
"You are hereby again requested to pay a sum of Rs. 232 (Two hundred thirty two) representing the cost of providing the information, which has been computed as per details given below: 116 pages."
5. Response of 8.5.07 from PIO Central Distt., as follows:
"It is informed you that your application has been considered and reply is ready to deliver to you. You may deposit Rs. 76/- (Rupees seventy six only) in accounts branch, Central Distt. and collect the requisite information/documents from RTI Cell."
6.Response of 14.5.07 from DCP (West Distt), as follows:
a. There is no specific period of time through which the process verification of badge is required to be sent back to the Transport Department.
b. As regards with your request to provide information since 2003 regarding badge verification, has been considered in this office, but could not be exceeded to u/s 8(1)(e and partly
j) and sec. 11 being 3rd party information, of the "RTI Act 2005."
c. Required no comments in view of above reply at Point No. 1 & 2."
47. Response of 14.5.07 from DCP (South West), as follows:
"a. There is no specific time period mentioned by the transport authority for verification of a badge. However, the process takes about 15 days for getting verification from concerned police station.
b&c The requisite information can not be provided in view of sec.
11 of the RTI Act, 2005."
8. Response of 16.5.07 from DCP New Delhi Distt., as follows:
"I am to state that there is no specific time period mentioned by the Transport Department for verification of badges. However, the process take about 15 days for getting verification from concerned Police Station and rest of information sought by you cannot be provided in view of section 8(1) (e) &(g) and 11 of Right to Information Act, 2005."
9. Response of 16.5.07 from Shri Manish Agarwal, PIO (North-West Distt), as follows:
"a. The verification application received from MLO/Ashok Vihar is sent to concerned SHOs to verify the contents. After receiving the verification report from the concerned police station, the same are sent to the DCP/SCRB (CRO) for proper verification at PHQ level. This process takes at least 40-45 days. Application received after verification are not kept in this office and forwarded to MLO/Ashok Vihar for further action.
b&c. The applications along with verification report of both the authorities i.e. SHOs and CRO Office are sent in original to MLO Office. Verification reports are not kept in this office. Thus the said information can only be furnished by the MLO/Ashok Vihar so far as relates to North-West District. Thus your application is being transferred to MLO, Transport Department, Ashok Vihar, Delhi u/s 6(3) of the RTI Act 2005. You may contact the MLO Transport Department, Ashok Vihar for taking requisite information."
(Shri Manish Agarwal also forwarded a copy of the application to the M.L.O. Transport Department, Ashok Vihar)
10. Response of Shri Ajay Chaudhary, PIO East Distt. as follows:
1. The verification process of badges takes generally 15 to 30 working days. However, there is no time limitation set by the 5 concerned authority. This is subject to enquiry by the IO in consultation of record at the local police level as well as SCRB. This office returns the papers the very next days as and when the enquiry process is completed.
2. The requisite information/ documents about every request for verification of badges received from the Transport Department to this office cannot be provided to you as the same is exempted from disclosure under section 8 (1) (j) &
11 of the Right to Information Act, 2005.
3. There is no time limitation set by the concerned Department for the purpose. As and when the process is completed, the report is submitted to the concerned Department immediately."
11. Response of 18.5.07 from Shri Anil Shukla, DCP South Distt., as follows:
"1. As and when the application for verification of character and antecedents of the applicants is received in this office from Transport Department of Delhi, the same is sent to the concerned police stations. After the verification by local police, the same is transmitted to the DCP/ SCRB, New Delhi. On receipt of the report from DCP/ SCRB, New Delhi, the same is sent to the Transport Department of Delhi. The process of verification passed through various channels, therefore, the specific period cannot be given. It is pertinent to mention here that the applications received from Transport Department of Delhi are only for verification of character and antecedents of the applicants. Therefore, it is difficult to tell whether these applications are for the badges for Auto ricksaw drivers or otherwise. However, the requisite information may be had from the Transport Department of Delhi.
9. The year wise details of application received from Transport Department of Delhi for the period 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2007 (unto 10.4.2007) and action taken is as under. The remaining information can be had from the Transport Department of Delhi Year Total number of Total number of Total application applications number of received from disposed off application Transport pending Department 2003 604 528 76 2004 1010 624 386 2005 1275 929 346 2006 1119 697 422 6 2007 498 62 436 (up to 10.4.07)
10. a, b, d to g) Enquiry Officers holding any enquiry/ verification do not attend to just one task at a time, several items of work are taken up including verification, therefore, it is difficult to tell precise reasons of delay. However, generally the person whose verification is being conducted is not found at the given address.
c) The requisite copy of relevant portion of dispatch and receipt register can not be provided under the provision of section 8 (1) (e) of Right to Information Act, 2005.
However, the details of applicant and other information cannot be provide under the provisions of section 8 (1) (e) of Right to Information Act, 2005."
Aggrieved by this response, Shri Agarwal moved his first appeal before Jt. Commissioner of Police (Hqrs) with the following prayer:
"The PIO be ordered to compile and provide complete and comprehensive information in one batch without forwarding any query to any one internally."
This prayer is grounded on two points:
"i. The PIO had no legal basis to invoke section 6(3) of the Act to transfer the application internally. ii. The information sought cannot cause invasion of anyone's privacy by any stretch of imagination. Further, section 11 deals only with the process of representation made by a third party, and cannot be used to deny information."
Upon this JCP Shri Satish Chandra in his order of 29.6.07 has directed as follows:
"I have gone through the application as well as reply given by various PIOs and transfer of application by PIO. PIO has correctly transferred the application u/s 6(3) of the Act to different PIOs as these PIOs have been designated under RTI Act 2005. The appellant may file his first appeal to the concerned Appellate Authority of the PIOs i.e. Jt. C.P. Ranges (New Delhi Range), Northern Range, Southern Range) and Joint C.P. Ops. Against the reply of the PIOs if the appellant is not satisfied with their replies."7
The appellant's prayer before us in his second appeal is as below:
"a. The respondent be directed to provide complete and comprehensive information free of cost in one batch without forwarding any query to anyone internally.
b. Penalty be imposed on the Respondent under sec. 20(1) of the Act for the delay in providing information."
The appeal was heard on 5.3.2009. The following are present:
Appellant Shri Rakesh Agarwal Respondents Shri Surender Kapoor, ACP Hqrs. Crime Shri Narendra Bundela, DCP / NW Shri M. R. Mehmi, ACP / RTI PHQ Shri S. S. Dahiya, ACP HQ Central Distt.
Shri Bawan Singh, ACP / PG North Distt.
Shri Om Kumar, APIO Outer Distt.
Shri Ganga Sahai, ACP Hqrs. East Distt.
Shri Jagdev Singh, ACP Hqrs. West Distt.
Shri V. A. Gupta, Addl. DCP New Delhi Distt. Shri Qamar Ahmad, Jt. C.P. Police Hqrs.
Shri L. R. Meena, APIO / North East Distt.
Shri Rishi Pal, Addl. DCP South Distt.
Shri Kewal Singh, Addl. CP Police Hqrs.
Shri Kewal Singh, Addl. C.P. Hqrs. Submitted that Police Hqrs. Obtain requests for information from various offices as well as from public. It is his responsibility to transfer these to the concerned DCPs. In the present case since all DCPs have a role in verifying applications for badges referred to them by the Transport Department, the application was transferred to all the DCPs. Appellant Shri Rakesh Agarwal submitted that as per the decision dated 25.2.06 of this Commission in Appeal No. 10/1/2005-CIC in the case of Er. Sarbajit Roy vs. Delhi Development Authority, we have held as follows:
"The DDA is a single public authority. Since this is a matter concerning adjustments within the same public authority, sec. 6(3) cannot apply."8
DECISION NOTICE In the matter of File No. CIC/WB/A/2007/00871 Shri Rakesh Agarwal submitted that since the PIO has failed to attend the hearing, Commission may proceed with the disposal of his appeal ex parte. With regard to this File (No. CIC/WB/A/2007/00871), since the intimation of the hearing has not been received by PIO or First Appellate Authority, it will in our opinion be unfair to proceed with the hearing ex-parte. This hearing is, therefore, adjourned to 30.3.2009 at 4.00 p.m. File No. CIC/WB/A/2007/00872 In the matter of this nature, we have had occasion to observe in the case of Shri Ajit Kar vs. Delhi Police (decided on 27.1.09 in Appeal No. CIC/WB/A/2007/01219) that by transferring the application to all DCPs on matters of policy, the Police Hqrs. is actually abdicating its responsibility under the RTI Act. The present case is another case in point. The result has been a series of contradictory responses received by appellant Shri Rakesh Agarwal unnecessarily burdening Districts, while at the same time confusing the applicant, thus serving little purpose except to cleave to the letter of the law. In this matter, as discussed during hearing, Q. 1 & 3 refer specifically to a timetable for processing verification. If there is no such prescribed time table, as appears to be the case at present, this information would require to be given.
On Q. 2 on the other hand, it is agreed by us that information must be sought from the DCPs. Respondents have submitted that information is not maintained in the format in which it is sought. On this reference may be made to sec. 7(9) which reads as follows:
An information shall ordinarily be provided in the form in which it is sough 1 t unless it would disproportionately divert the resources of the public authority or would be detrimental to the safety or preservation of the record in question."1
Underlined by us for specific reference 9 It, therefore, follows that if information can be compiled in the format sought without disproportionately diverting the resources of the public authority or would be detrimental to the safety of the preservation of record in question, it should be so provided. In this context and in light of the fact that in some cases sec. 11 had been pleaded as a ground for refusing information, which the law does not, Shri Rakesh Agarwal offered to assist with the training of PIOs in the Police Hqrs., an offer which is for the Commissioner of Police to consider.
In the present case, the orders of the First Appellate Authority are set aside. The matter is now referred to the Addl. Commissioner of Police Shri Kewal Singh, PHQ who will examine the matter in light of our observations, obtain such information as is required to fill up any gaps in responding to point 2 from the concerned officers u/s 5(4) of the RTI Act, and provide an answer to appellant Shri Rakesh Agarwal within twenty working days of the date of receipt of this decision notice. The appeal is allowed. There will be no cost.
Announced in the hearing. Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
(Wajahat Habibullah) Chief Information Commissioner 5.3.2009 Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against application and payment of the charges, prescribed under the Act, to the CPIO of this Commission.
(Pankaj Shreyaskar) Joint Registrar 5.3.2009 10