Central Information Commission
Shri M L Gupta vs Lic Of India on 22 January, 2010
209 210 211 212 M L Gupta Karyala Kamzor Varg Samooh Bima Abhiyan Pendra Road Distt ilaspur Chhattisgarh 22 01 2010
Central Information Commission
Room No.296, II Floor, B Wing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi
110066
Telefax:01126180532 & 01126107254 websitecic.gov.in
Complaint No. CIC/AT/C/2009/000209DS
Complaint No. CIC/AT/C/2009/000210DS
Complaint No. CIC/AT/C/2009/000211DS
Complaint No. CIC/AT/C/2009/000212DS
Complainant : Karyalaya Kamzor Varg Samooh Bima
Abhiyaan,
Pendra Road, Disst. Bilaspur,
Chhattisgarh.
Public Authority : LIC of India, Pandri, Raipur, Chattisgarh -
492 004.
Facts:-
The complainant had made four RTI applications, all dated 17/12/2008 and sought information from Divisional Office of LIC, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, on Rs.10/- non-judicial Stamp Paper.
2. The CPIO of LIC responded to all these four RTI applications vide his letter(s) of 18/12/2008 in which he drew their attention to the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 which lays down that Rs.10/- is to be deposited with each RTI Application by the concerned person either by cash or by Demand Draft or cheque and they have asked the complainant-Karyalaya to take action accordingly.
3. Regarding all the above four RTI applications, vide their letter(s) of 14/01/2009, Shri Gupta, representing the complainant-Karyalaya, has appealed to the State Information Commission at Raipur against non-supply of information to them by LIC.
4. The State Information Commission has forwarded the above mentioned four RTI applications to the Central Information Commission on 03/02/2009.
5. Accordingly, the Commission, vide letter(s) dated 27/04/2009 (issued on 26/05/2009 by Central Information Commission), in all the above mentioned complaints, directed the respondent to send his comments on the complaint(s), received u/s 18 of the RTI Act, 2005, within ten days of receipt of this letter.
6. However, perusal of the file shows that no comments have been received.
7. Section 6(1) of the RTI Act, 2005 reads as under:-
"(1) A person, who desires to obtain any information under this Act, shall make a request in writing or through electronic means in English or Hindi in the official language of the area in which the application is being made, accompanying such fee as may be prescribed, to - .................... ."
8. The fee prescribed by Right to Information (Regulation of Fee and Cost) Rules, 2005, wherein the mode of payment of fee is given in Rule 3 as under:-
"3. A request for obtaining information under sub-section (1) of section 6 shall be accompanied by an application fee of rupees ten by way of cash against proper receipt or by demand draft or bankers cheque or Indian Postal Order payable to the Accounts Officer of the public authority."
DECISION
9. Since the complainant has not paid the fee through the prescribed mode, all the four RTI applications are not valid applications, as per the prescribed rules. It is also taken note that the CPIO, LIC, vide letter dated 18/12/2008 has also pointed out that prescribed fee has not been paid.
10. In view of this, the complaints, as such, are not maintainable.
11. The complainant is directed to file fresh RTI applications with appropriate fee to seek information and in case he is not satisfied, he can use appeal procedure to seek information.
(Smt. Deepak Sandhu) Information Commissioner (DS) Authenticated true copy:
(Tarun Kumar) Joint Secretary & Addl. Registrar Copy to: 1 Shri M.L. Gupta, C/o Karyalaya Kamzor Varg Samooh Bima Abhiyaan, Pendra Road, Disst. Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.
2. The Manager (CRM) & Central Public Information Officer, Under RTI Act, 2005, Life Insurance Corporation of India, "Jeevan Prakash", Jeevan Bima Marg, Pandri, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
3. The Appellate Authority, Under RTI Act, 2005, Life Insurance Corporation of India, "Jeevan Prakash", Jeevan Bima Marg, Pandri, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.