Central Information Commission
Pratap Chandra Khandai vs Ministry Of Social Justice & ... on 12 November, 2020
Author: Neeraj Kumar Gupta
Bench: Neeraj Kumar Gupta
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग,मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं या/Second Appeal No. CIC/MOSJE/A/2019/108114
Pratap Chandra Khandai ... अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO, M/o Social Justice & ... ितवादी/Respondent
Empowerment, Department of
Social Justice & Empowerment,
New Delhi.
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:
RTI : 22-10-2018 FA : 15-12-2018 SA : 21-02-2019
CPIO : Not on record FAO : Not on record Hearing : 05-11-2020
ORDER
1. The appellant filed an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), M/o Social Justice & Empowerment, Department of Social Justice & Empowerment, New Delhi seeking following information:-
1. "The Copy of the inspection report of Inspecting Officer who conducted the inspection of NGO Orissa Multipurpose Development Centre, Naindipur, Kendrapara on 21-03-2018.
2. The vehicle hired for conducting the inspection of NGO Multipurpose Development Centre on 21-03-2018. The photocopy or the bill should be furnished with attestation.
3. The Hotel bill if any furnished by Sri Ajit Samal, Company Secretary to the Ministry in connection with the inspection of NGO Multipurpose Development Centre.
4. The photocopy of the Air Ticket/Train ticket both coming & returning of Sri Samal for the purpose of visit to the NGO Page 1 of 3 Multipurpose Development Centre in connection with the inspection.
5. The photocopy of all the bills submitted by Sri Samal in connection with the inspection of NGO Multipurpose Development Centre."
2. As the CPIO did not furnish a reply within a period of 30 days, the appellant filed the first appeal dated 15-12-2018 which was not disposed of by the first appellate authority. Thereafter, he filed a second appeal u/Section 19(3) of the RTI Act before the Commission requesting to take appropriate legal action against the CPIO u/Section 20 of the RTI Act, 2005 and also to direct him to provide the sought for information.
Hearing:
3. The appellant, Mr. Pratap Chandra Khandai did not attend the hearing and also could not be contacted at the scheduled time of hearing despite efforts. Mr. A P Gupta, CPIO/Under Secretary participated in the hearing representing the respondent through audio conferencing. The written submissions are taken on record.
4. The respondent could not connect with the contents of the RTI application and instead mixed up the matter with a letter sent to the NGO. Decision:
5. Since the appellant is not present to attend the hearing, this Commission takes note of the documents annexed with the 2nd appeal wherein he has expressed his displeasure on not providing the information.
6. This Commission observes that Mr. A P Gupta, CPIO/Under Secretary could not relate to the facts of the case and has instead mixed up the matter with a letter sent to the NGO. He has neither uploaded his written submissions on the given web-link nor has bothered to send a timely reply to the appellant prior to the date of hearing. Therefore, he is warned to exercise due care for future to ensure that the correct and complete information is furnished timely to the RTI applicant as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 failing which penal proceedings under Section 20 may be initiated in future.
7. This Commission further observes that the then CPIO has not sent a reply to the appellant within the timeline prescribed under the RTI Act, 2005. It appears that he is not well versed with the procedural requirements of the RTI Act, 2005. The lackadaisical approach of the respondent in the matter is strongly deprecated. This Commission hopes that the public authority will take appropriate steps to improve its functioning so that recurrence of such incident is avoided in future. In view of this, the then CPIO who held charge of the RTI application from the date Page 2 of 3 of receipt of the RTI application till a period of 30 days is directed to show cause as to why penalty should not be imposed on him for contravening the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005, within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.
8. In the meanwhile, the CPIO is further directed to send a point-wise reply to the appellant with reference to the RTI application as per the RTI Act, 2005 if already not provided, after redacting the exempted personal information, within a period of 15 working days from the date of receipt of this order.
9. With the above observations, the appeal is disposed of.
10. Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
नीरज कु मार गु ा)
Neeraj Kumar Gupta (नीरज ा
सूचना आयु )
Information Commissioner (सू
दनांक / Date 05.11.2020
Authenticated true copy
(अिभ मािणत स यािपत ित)
S. C. Sharma (एस. सी. शमा),
Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक),
(011-26105682)
Addresses of the parties:
1. The CPIO,
M/o Social Justice & Empowerment,
Under Secretary, Department of Social Justice & Empowerment, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi-110001.
2. Pratap Chandra Khandai, Page 3 of 3