Central Information Commission
Neeraj Sharma vs Prime Minister'S Office on 2 March, 2021
के ीयसूचनाआयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबागंगनाथमाग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi-110067
ि तीय अपील सं या / Second Appeal Nos.: CIC/PMOIN/C/2019/602116
िशकायत सं या / Complaint Nos. CIC/PMOIN/A/2019/602681
CIC/PMOIN/A/2019/603107
CIC/PMOIN/C/2019/638521
CIC/PMOIN/C/2020/678341
CIC/PMOIN/A/2020/683578
Shri Neeraj Sharma, ... अपीलकता/Appellant/
New Delhi िशकायतकता/Complainant
Through: Sh. Pulkit Verma - Advocate
VERSUS/बनाम
PIO, Under Secretary, Prime Minister's Office,
South Block, New Delhi-110011
Through: Sh. Parveen Kumar - US, RTI/CPIO
and Sh. Arun Kumar - CAPIO ... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 01.03.2021
Date of Decision : 02.03.2021
Chief Information Commissioner : Shri Y. K. Sinha
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
Since both the parties are same, the above mentioned cases are clubbed
together for hearing and disposal.
Case No. RTI Filed CPIO reply First appeal FAO 2nd
on Appeal/
Complaint
received
on
602116 07.10.2018 06.11.2018 14.11.2018 31.12.2018 04.02.2019
602681 07.10.2018 06.11.2018 14.11.2018 31.12.2018 11.02.2019
603107 28.08.2018 27.09.2018 04.11.2018 10.12.2018 17.02.2019
638521 23.02.2019 18.06.2019 16.04.2019 09.07.2019 17.04.2019
678341 17.05.2020 24.06.2020 - - 17.07.2020
683578 17.05.2020 24.06.2020 13.07.2020 24.08.2020 28.08.2020
Page 1 of 7
(1) CIC/PMOIN/C/2019/602116
(2) CIC/PMOIN/A/2019/602681
The Complainant/Appellant filed an RTI application dated 07.10.2018 seeking
information relating to certain communication of Shri Subramanian Swamy,
MP, Rajya Sabha for the year 2017-18 on following 8 points:
1. Certified copy of note sheet indicating notings by various officials and decision
of competent authority with respect to communication referred to above, from
Hon'ble Rajya Sabha MP Subramanian Swamy.
2. Certified copy of investigation report or feedback obtained with respect to the
issues raised in the Note received by your office along with communication /
representation referred to above, from Hon'ble Rajya Sabha MP Subramanian
Swamy.
3. Certified copy of letter, directions and/or instructions issued to concerned
authority/subordinate office as a follow up action based on communication
referred to above, from Rajya Sabha MP Subramanian Swamy.
4. Certified copy of the reply communication sent by your Public Authority to the
Rajya Sabha MP Subramanian Swamy with respect to the issues raised in the
letter received by your office along with communication/representation
referred to above, from Hon'ble Rajya Sabha MP Subramanian Swamy.
5. Certified copy/copies of the communication(s) with all documents received by
your public authority with respect to communication referred to above, from
Hon'ble Rajya Sabha MP Subramanian Swamy.
6. Is any communication received by PMO with respect to communication
referred to above, from Hon'ble Rajya Sabha MP Subramanian Swamy?
7. Is any timed given to Hon'ble Rajya Sabha MP Subramanian Swamy by PMO
to meet on with respect to communication referred to above as he mentioned in
his tweet?
8. Please provide the Time and date of that meeting and copy MoM of that
meeting.
The CPIO, Prime Minister's Office, Delhi furnished an interim reply to the
Complainant/Appellant vide letter dated 06.11.2018 stating that the matter is
being processed by the Respondent's office and reply/information will be sent
as soon as possible.
Dissatisfied with the reply received from the PIO, the Appellant filed a First
Appeal dated 14.11.2018. The FAA vide order dated 31.12.2018 observed that
final reply in the matter is yet to be provided to the Appellant. In view of the
submission made, the CPIO, PMO is directed to expedite furnishing the response
within 15 working days from the date of issue of this letter to the Appellant.
In compliance with the FAA's order, the PIO/PMO sent a reply dated
18.03.2019. Still not satisfied, the Complainant/Appellant approached the
Commission with the instant Complaint/Second Appeal.
Facts emerging during the course of hearing:
Written submissions received immediately before the hearing, indicate that the PIO had provided a reply, vide letter dated 18.03.2019, in compliance of the FAA's order dated 31.12.2018.
Page 2 of 7In order to ensure social distancing and prevent the spread of the pandemic, COVID-19, hearings through video conference were scheduled after giving prior notice to both the parties. Both parties are heard through video conference. The Applicant - Sh. Neeraj Sharma pointed out that no information had been provided by the Respondent in their reply which was sent belatedly. It was further argued by him that the FAA's order had also been sent, much beyond the timeline of forty five as specified under the Section 19(6) of the RTI Act, 2005. The Respondent on their part contended that since information had to be collected from different units, admittedly there has been an unintentional delay in furnishing a reply by the Respondents.
Decision Both parties are heard and facts of the case duly examined. It is noted that information as available on record has been provided by the Respondent. Therefore, what is left for adjudication is the issue of delay in furnishing of the response. It is noted that the Respondent had furnished an interim reply on 06.11.2018, which is within the mandated timeline. Compliance of the FAA's order dated 31.12.2018 has undoubtedly been delayed without any reasonable cause being furnished for the same.
Under the circumstances, the Respondent -PIO/PMO is directed to furnish an explanation for the inordinate delay of over two months in complying with the FAA's orders. The explanation should reach the Commission by 31.03.2021, failing which appropriate action shall be initiated on the basis of records available and as per law.
(3) CIC/PMOIN/A/2019/603107 The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 28.08.2018 seeking information on following 3 points:
1. Please provide the copy of Speech which PM read on 15.08.2018 from Red Fort.
2. Please provide the name of the Officers with their designation / rank, who are involved in writing and drafting of PM Speech which PM read on 15.08.2018 from Red Fort.
3. Please provide the all supporting documents, notes, reports, letters, Emails etc. which are used to write the PM Speech.
[ The CPIO, Prime Minister's Office, Delhi furnished an interim reply to the Appellant vide letter dated 27.09.2018 stating that the matter is being processed by this office and reply/information will be sent as soon as possible.
Dissatisfied with the reply received from the PIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 04.11.2018. The FAA vide order dated 10.12.2018 observed that final reply in the matter is yet to be provided to the Appellant. In view of the submission made, the CPIO, PMO is directed to expedite furnishing the response within 15 working days from the date of issue of this letter to the Appellant.
Page 3 of 7In compliance of the FAA's order, the CPIO, Prime Minister's Office, Delhi furnished a point wise reply to the Appellant vide letter dated 28.01.2019. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Appeal.
Facts emerging during the course of hearing:
In order to ensure social distancing and prevent the spread of the pandemic, COVID-19, hearings through video conference were scheduled after giving prior notice to both the parties. Both parties are heard through video conference. It has been brought to the notice of the Commission that a Complaint being no. CIC/PMOIN/C/2018/633033 had already been adjudicated by an erstwhile Bench of this Commission vide order dated 29.01.2019. In the said order, it was observed by the Commission that pointwise information in response to the RTI application had been furnished vide letter dated 28.01.2019, in compliance with the FAA's order dated 10.12.2018. Considering the above facts, the Commission in its order dated 29.01.2019 had held as under:
"...6. The Commission, after hearing the submissions of both the parties and perusing the records, observes that information, though delayed, has been provided by the respondent as per available records. The Commission accepts the respondent's submissions that the information sought for could not be furnished in time due to the death of the officer concerned, to whom the RTI application had been forwarded. The Commission further observes that since the information sought was provided to the complainant, it cannot be said that it was malafidely or deliberately denied by the respondent. Hence, in the absence of any malafide intention, it would not be appropriate to initiate any action for imposition of penalty on the CPIO..."
Decision In the light of the above decision by an erstwhile Bench of this Commission deciding a case emanating out of an identical RTI application, fresh adjudication is barred in this case by operation of the principle of res judicata.
(4) CIC/PMOIN/C/2019/638521 The Complainant filed an RTI application dated23.02.2019 seeking information on following 2 points:
1. Please provide certified copy of "CPIO WISE PENDING APPEAL" Report for the year 2009-2019.
2. Please provide certified copy of "CPIO WISE PENDING REQUEST"
Report for the year 2009-2019.
The CPIO, PMO, Delhi furnished a reply to the Complainant vide letter dated 18.06.2019 stating as under:Page 4 of 7
"Applicant may please refer to the information already provided vide letter No. RTI/8934/2018-PMR dated 14.06.2019, in response to his similar RTI application (Online no. 53348) dated 19.7.2018."
Meanwhile, the Complainant filed a First Appeal dated 16.04.2019 (not enclosed). The FAA vide order dated 09.07.2019 observed that: During the hearing it was clarified to the appellant that the appeal subjected to in this case will be decided along with his other similar pending applications where CIC vide decision dated 06.02.2019 directed this office to provide reply within four weeks. Since compilation and verification of huge data/information was involved, this office sought additional time from the CIC for providing reply to the Appellant. Finally, on 18.06.2019, reply was furnished to the Applicant as per direction of the CIC." A copy of the letter dated 18.06.2019 sent in compliance with the Commission's earlier order was also enclosed with FAA's reply.
Dissatisfied with the response, Complainant approached the Commission with the instant Complaint.
Facts emerging during the course of hearing:
In order to ensure social distancing and prevent the spread of the pandemic, COVID-19, hearings through video conference were scheduled after giving prior notice to both the parties. Both parties are heard through video conference and the Complainant states that information has been deliberately denied and obstructed by the Respondent, by a frivolous reply. Respondent averred that the same subject matter of "CPIO wise pending appeal and request" was heard by an earlier Bench of the Commission on 29.01.2019, in the form of cases number CIC/PMOIN/A/2018/636549 and CIC/PMOIN/C/ 2018/631261 whereby the Respondent was directed to furnish the desired information to the information-seeker, within four weeks of receipt of the order. The Commission's order was duly complied by the Respondent vide communication dated 18.06.2019, as noted in the FAA's detailed and self explanatory order dated 09.07.2019.
Decision Upon hearing the averments of both parties and perusal of the relevant records of the case, the Commission notes that though there has been some delay in furnishing of the information, the delay does not appear to be intentional or deliberate. No case of malafide and wilful concealment of information or deliberate obstruction in dissemination thereof by the Respondent has been established, necessitating action under Section 18 of the RTI Act.
(5) CIC/PMOIN/C/2020/678341 (6) CIC/PMOIN/A/2020/683578 The Complainant/Appellant filed an RTI application dated 17.05.2020 seeking information on following 7 points:Page 5 of 7
1. Please provide the list of Members of PM Care Fund Trust.
2. Please share the act name under which PM Care fund constituted.
3. Please provide names of the auditors of PM care fund & provide the selection procedure of auditors.
4. Please provide the certified copy of PM Care fund Trust registration certificate with all documents.
5. Please provide total amount received as donation in fund as of today.
6. Please provide certified copy of note sheet indicating noting by PM, PMO various officials, Emails, letter, directions and/or instructions issued to concerned authority/subordinate office as a follow up action based on Constitution of PM care Fund Trust.
7. Please provide certified copy the expenses statement of PM Care Fund Trust.
The CPIO, Prime Minister's Office, Delhi furnished a reply to the Complainant/ Appellant vide letter dated 24.06.2020 stating as under:
"PM CARES FUND is not a Public Authority under the ambit of Section 2(h) of the RTI Act, 2005. However, relevant information in respect of PM CARES FUND may be seen on the website pmcares.gov.in."
Dissatisfied with the reply received from the PIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 13.07.2020. The FAA vide order dated 24.08.2020 observed that the application does not pertain to an authority that comes under the definition of section 2(h) of the RTI Act, 2005 and upheld the reply of PIO.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Complainant/Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Complaint /Second Appeal.
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
A written submission has been received from CPIO vide letter dated 25.02.2021, reiterating the above facts.
In order to ensure social distancing and prevent the spread of the pandemic, COVID-19, hearings through video conference were scheduled after giving prior notice to both the parties. Both parties are present for hearing through video conference and the counsel for the Applicant submitted that in this case, the information has been denied without resorting to provisions of Section 8 and 9 of the RTI Act, 2005. He further emphasised during the hearing that information held by PMO should have been provided with respect to PM Cares Fund Trust, even if it is an admitted legal position that the PM Cares Fund Trust has not yet been declared a public authority, under the purview of the RTI Act.
Decision:
Page 6 of 7The information sought in the above two cases pertains to a body, viz. the PM Cares Fund. A public interest litigation is pending before the Delhi High Court to decide whether the said organization falls within the ambit of the RTI Act, 2005. Hence at this stage, the queries raised relate to an organisation which has not been declared as a public authority under Section 2(h) of the RTI Act, 2005. Thus, no infirmity is found with the replies furnished by the Respondent and no interference is warranted in the above two cases, at this stage.
The cases mentioned hereinabove are thus disposed off.
Y. K. Sinha(वाई. के .िस हा) Chief Information Commissioner(मु य सूचना आयु Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणतस ािपत ित) S. K. Chitkara (एस. के . िचटकारा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26180514 Page 7 of 7