Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

Asa Ram vs Gnctd on 8 July, 2024

                              केन्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
                        Central Information Commission
                           बाबा गंगनाथ मागग, मुननरका
                         Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                         नई निल्ली, New Delhi - 110067


File No: CIC/GNCTD/A/2024/112021

Asa Ram                                                  .....अपीलकर्ाग /Appellant

                                        VERSUS
                                         बनाम
PIO,
Office of the Sub-Registrar-III,
4/7. Asaf Ali Road, District Central,
New Delhi-110002.                                     ....प्रनर्वािीगण /Respondent

Date of Hearing                     :    04.07.2024
Date of Decision                    :    05.07.2024

INFORMATION COMMISSIONER :               Vinod Kumar Tiwari

Relevant facts emerging from appeal:

RTI application filed on            :    21.01.2022
CPIO replied on                     :    23.02.2022 and 07.11.2023
First appeal filed on               :    26.03.2023
First Appellate Authority's order   :    27.06.2023
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated          :    18.04.2024

Information sought

:

The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 21.01.2022 seeking the following information:

1. Sub-Registrar-Ⅲ office lost WILL document vide Paras No. 1 and No. 2 of letter No. F.SR-II/Records/2021/ 1138 dated 08 Nov 2021. Photocopy of letter is attached.

2. SR-III requested to the Director of Delhi Archives to issue a certificate to the applicant on the basis of Delhi REGISTER of year 1998 Which is available in your office so that the aforesaid document cannot Verified Page 1 of 5 vide Para No. 3 of letter No.F.SR-III/Records/2021/932-939 dated 08 oct 2021. Photo copy of litter is attached.

3. After issued the Certificate by the Deptt. of Delhi Archives, SR-III backed out his earlier Commitment to verify the aforesaid, document, and note intimated that certified copy of the alleged WILL Cannot be issued on the basis photo copy of alleged document Submitted by the applicant, as there is no provision to issued the certify copy on the basis of photo copy of any document Vide Para No.4 of letter at 08 Nov 2021.

2. Please furnish a copy of letter wherein mentioned there is no provision that any document of photocopy cam not be verified While PUBLIC DOCUMENT Lost by the GOVT. / State GOVT.

3. Kindly to provide a copy of letter pertains Supporting material, how can I get the photocopy of WILL document verified.

The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 23.02.2022 stating as under:

2. In this regard it is to inform that the document can be reconstruct on the basis of prevision of the Higher Authorities, After submitting the original documents along with copy.

3. Mentioned as above.

Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 26.03.2023. The FAA vide its order dated 27.06.2023. held as under.

1. Shri Asa Ram had filed an appeal under Sec. 19(1) of Right to Information Act, 2005 on 25.3.2022.

2. Case called on 26.6.2023.

3. Present Shri Asa Ram, appellant.

4. Also present Shri Sunny Dalal, ASO for the APIO/SR-III.

5. Heard both the parties.

6. The appellant submitted that as per the reply given by PIO/ SR-III dated 23.2.2022 in respect of his RTI application dated 27.1.2022 it is informed that "In this regard it is to inform that the document can be reconstruct on the basis of provision of the Higher Authorities, after submitting the original documents along with copy." Не asked for the copy of said provision/ Rule/order/ circular stated in the reply by PIO/ SR-III.

7. APIO/SR-III is directed to go through the RTI application once again and provide the requisite information to the appellant as per the RTI Act, 2005 within 10 days from the receipt of this order under intimation to this office.

In compliance with FAA order, the PIO vide letter dated 07.11.2023 has given revised reply to the Appellant, which states as below:

"With reference to your RTI application dated 27/01/2022 subsequent RTI Appeal order dated 27.06.2023, the requisite information pertaining to SR-III, Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi are as under: -

2. No such information is available in this office.

3. Mentioned as above."

Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.

Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:

The following were present:-

Appellant: Present in person.

Respondent: Ms. Ankur Bhardwaj, S.O. (Civ.) & PIO and Ms. Chanchal, Sr. Assistant present in person.

Written submissions of the Respondent are taken on record.

The Appellant, during the hearing, reiterated the contents of his RTI application and instant appeal and submitted that till date complete and correct information has not been provided to him by the Respondent. He further contended that 'Will' documents are misplaced by the Respondent Public Authority which amounts to breach of trust. He further submitted that the Deptt. of Delhi Archives had issued a certificate and the Respondent Public Authority earlier informed him that photocopy will be attested on this basis but now after filing of RTI application, the same is refused by the Respondent Public Authority.

The Respondent submitted that vide their letters dated 23.02.2022 and 07.11.2023, they have categorically informed the Appellant that document can be reconstruct after prior approval of the Higher Authorities, after submitting the original documents along with copy. However, in the instant case, during the year 2019, an FIR was lodged by the department regarding missing of certain 'Wills' and other documents from the office.

Decision:

The Commission, after hearing the submissions of both the parties and after perusal of records, observes that the Appellant is aggrieved that information was not provided to him as per his RTI application. On the other hand, the Respondent contended that the information as per the documents available on record has already been provided to the Appellant.

The Commission is of the considered opinion that the CPIO is only a communicator of information based on the records held in the office and hence, he cannot be expected to do research work to deduce anything from the material therein and then supply it to him. The CPIO can only provide information which is held by them in their records within the public authority.

However, considering the above said contesting claims of the Appellant and the Respondent, the present PIO is directed to file an affidavit with the Commission with a copy of it duly endorsed to the Appellant, free of cost deposing categorically that information sought (copy of Will as sought in the RTI application) is not available in their records. The said affidavit should reach the Commission within two weeks from the date of receipt of this order.

The FAA is directed to ensure compliance of this order.

The appeal is disposed of accordingly.

Vinod Kumar Tiwari (विनोद कुमार वििारी) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयुक्त) Authenticated true copy (अनिप्रमानणर् सत्यानपर् प्रनर्) (S. Anantharaman) Dy. Registrar 011- 26181927 Date Page 4 of 5 Copy To:

The FAA GOVT.OF NCT OF DELHI THE FAA, ADM (CENTRAL) 14, DARYA GANJ, DELHI - 110002.

Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-

Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)