Central Information Commission
Mrm P Saxena vs Csir Hqrs.,New Delhi on 31 July, 2015
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Room No. - 308, 2nd Floor, August Kranti Bhawan,
Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi - 110066.
Website: cic.gov.in
File No. CIC/KY/A/2015/000597
Appellant : Dr. M P Saxena
Ex sct G, IIP Dehraudn
17-Tegbahadur Road-1, Dehradun-05
Public Authority : The CPIO
Council of Scientific & Industrial Research,
Anusandhan Bhawan, 2 Rafi Marg, Delhi-110001
Date of Hearing : 31.07.2015
Date of Decision : 31.07.2015
Presence:
Appellant : Absent
CPIO : Sh. Anoj K. Chadar, Scientist -D
FACTS:
I. Vide RTI application dated 06.01.2015, the appellant sought information on the 3 issues.
II. CPIO, vide his response dated 16.03.2015, not provided the information to the appellant.
III. The First Appeal (FA) was filed on 27.02.2015, as desired information not provided.
IV. First Appellate Authority (FAA), order is not on record. V. Grounds for the Second Appeal filed on 09.06.2015, are contained in the Memorandum of Appeal.
HEARING Appellant opted to be absent despite of our due notice to him. Respondents appeared before the Commission personally and made the submissions at length.
DECISION It would be seen here that the appellant, vide his RTI Application dated 06.01.2015, sought information from the respondents on three issues. Respondents, vide their response dated 16.03.2015, allegedly not provided the required information to the appellant. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid response, FA was filed by the appellant on 27.02.2015 before the FAA, who could not take up the same for its disposal for the reasons best known to him. Hence, a Second Appeal before this Commission.
......2 -2-
2. It is pertinent to mention here that the CPIO, vide his response dated 16.03.2015, provided the required information to appellant, issue-wise, on his RTI application dated 06.01.2015, as under:
" 1. Letters sent to CSIR are under consideration.
2. The matter is under examination.
3. Does not arise. "
3. In view of the nature of reply provided by the CPIO as above, it becomes amply clear that the appellant's letter dated 30.07.2014, and its reminder dated 30.09.2014 sent to DG - CSIR, stated to have been still under consideration and examination on 16.03.2015 itself.
4. During hearing of the appeal, a query was raised by the Commission to Sh. Anoj K. Chadar, Scientist -D, as what is a latest position of the letters dated 30.07.2014 as on date. On this, it is replied by Sh. Anoj K. Chadar, Scientist -D, that the same is still under consideration and examination which appears to be very shocking to this Commission that even after lapse of more than one year, no action was taken on the letter (Supra). This shows the working style of the officer concerned. In view of this the respondent's response dated 16.03.2015, is legally not tenable and deserves to be quashed and set aside. Thus, it is quashed and set aside.
5. The Commission heard the submissions made by respondents at length. The Commission also perused the case-file thoroughly; specifically, nature of issues raised by the appellant in his RTI application dated 06.01.2015, respondent's response dated 16.03.2015, and also the grounds of memorandum of second appeal.
6. The Commission is of the considered view that the appellant has been deprived by the respondents deliberately from having the benefits of the RTI Act 2005, even after lapse of more than seven months period. Thus, the respondents have defeated the very purpose of the RTI Act 2005 for which it was legislated by Parliament of India. It is also admitted fact that, as on date, respondents failed to provide the required information to the appellant. As such, the Commission feels that it would be appropriate and even justified to allow the appellant's second appeal in toto instead of remanding back to learned FAA for disposal of FA which is even more time consuming. Therefore, it is allowed in toto.
....3 -3-
7. In view of the above and in the circumstances of the case, the respondent's are hereby directed to take the final view on the letter dated 30.07.2014 after examining the same expeditiously and to provide the complete and categorical information, issue-wise, to the appellant as per his RTI application, in accordance with the provisions of RTI Act 2005, within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order under intimation to this Commission. If need be, Section 5(4) of the RTI Act 2005 be also invoked in the matter.
The Appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Sd/-
(M.A. Khan Yusufi) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy (Prakash) Deputy Registrar The CPIO Council of Scientific & Industrial Research, Anusandhan Bhawan, 2 Rafi Marg, Delhi-110001 Dr. M P Saxena Ex sct G, IIP Dehraudn 17-Tegbahadur Road-1, Dehradun-05