Complainant stated that he did not visit the MES office because some staff members threatened him of dire consequences for pursuing his RTI Application - CIC: CPIO is hereby warned to be extremely careful in future while with matters under RTI Act
The Complainant sought information regarding expenditure incurred out of the public fund for different types of works of construction, repair, maintenance etc undertaken by MES for Depot at 13 BRD, AF Palamfrom 01.04.2014 to 31.03.2017, details of the fund from which construction of CSD Canteen was effected alongwith details of proposal and name of its approving authority. Grounds for the Complaint: 2 The CPIO has not provided the desired information. Relevant Facts emerging during
The following were present:-
Complainant: Present in person.
Respondent: Major Abhishek Ranjan, CPIO and Pramod Gautam, O/o Garrison Engineer (AF), MES, Tughlakabad, New Delhi present in person.
Complainant stated that he did not visit the office of the CPIO because some staff members threatened him of dire consequences for pursuing his RTI Application. CPIO submitted that information sought for three financial years pertained to about 150 work contracts and file on each contract comprised roughly 200 pages. He further submitted that in view of this, the Complainant was asked to visit him for limiting the scope of information. He furthermore submitted had the Complainant brought to his notice any intimidation by his office staff, he would have inquired into the issue.
Commission observes that CPIO should have provided specific reply invoking Section 7(9) An information shall ordinarily be provided in the form in which it is sought unless it would disproportionately divert the resources of the public authority or would be detrimental to the safety or preservation of the record in question. of the RTI Act and should have intimated the date and time for inspection of relevant records. CPIO has also erred in not providing any information on para 2 of the RTI Application when the data sought therein is very much specific in nature. However, Commission fails to find any malafide intent on the part of the CPIO in having erred in the said manner while replying on the RTI Application. Notwithstanding the same, CPIO is hereby warned to be extremely careful in future while with matters under RTI Act.
The Complaint is disposed of accordingly.
(Divya Prakash Sinha)
Citation: Vijaypal v. Garrison Engineer (AF), Military Engineer Services in File No. CIC/MESER/C/2017/147109/SD, Date of Decision:15/02/2018