Forty years old information was sought - PIO: appellant was invited to inspect the files - CIC: the concerned authority should systematize the record keeping and fix responsibility for the missing files; provide action taken report to the appellant & CIC
Forty years old information was sought - PIO: appellant was invited to inspect the files - CIC: provide the information as available on records; the concerned authority should systematize the record keeping and fix responsibility on the persons who are in charge of files missing, furnish the entire information about the missing of the files since 2010 and inform the present status of enquiry and if enquiry is completed, the action taken report should be shared with the appellant and the Commission
Since the issues raised on the above twenty eight appeals are more or less similar, it has been decided to dispose them through a common order.
2. Heard on 17.4.14. Appellant not present. Public Authority is represented by Shri Sunder Bora, Dy. Secretary.
3. During the hearing, the Respondent submitted that they had invited the Appellant to inspect the files but the Appellant did not turn up. The Respondent added that Appellant is seeking information which is forty years old.
4. The Commission after hearing the submissions made directs the PIO to go through all the RTI applications once again and to provide the information as available on records to the Appellant within forty five days of receipt of this order. In the event, the information is not available, PIO is directed to inform the Appellant about the same and the reasons for its nonavailability.
5. It appears that there is no proper record management and the Commission directs the concerned authority to systematize the record keeping and fix responsibility on the persons who are in charge of files missing. The officer who is responsible for the safe keep of the files is responsible for providing information under RTI Act. The claim that files are missing is not supported by any explanation under RTI Act. Any officer who is making that claim has to establish how it happened and what action was taken to recover the files or to fix up the responsibility on the person concerned. In the absence of such action, Commission will assume that the claim of the Respondent that the file is missing is not correct and it was made only to deny the information. It is violation of RTI Act for which penalty can be imposed. Hence the Respondent Authority is directed to furnish the entire information about the missing of the files since 2010 and also to inform the present status of enquiry and if enquiry is completed, the action taken report should be shared with the Appellant and the Commission. The exercise to be completed within one month of completion of enquiry.
(M. Sridhar Acharyulu)
Citation: Jagat Singh Nagar v. Land & Building Dept., in CIC/AD/A/2013/001365SA IC/AD/A/2013/001366SA CIC/AD/A/2013/001367SA CIC/AD/A/2013/001368SA CIC/AD/A/2013/001369SA CIC/AD/A/2013/001370SA CIC/AD/A/2013/001371SA CIC/AD/A/2013/001372SA CIC/AD/A/2013/001373SA CIC/AD/A/2013/001374SA CIC/AD/A/2013/001375SA CIC/AD/A/2013/001376SA CIC/AD/A/2013/001377SA CIC/AD/A/2013/001378SA CIC/AD/A/2013/001379SA CIC/AD/A/2013/001380SA CIC/AD/A/2013/001381SA CIC/AD/A/2013/001382SA CIC/AD/A/2013/001383SA CIC/AD/A/2013/001384SA CIC/AD/A/2013/001385SA CIC/AD/A/2013/001386SA CIC/AD/A/2013/001387SA CIC/AD/A/2013/001388SA CIC/AD/A/2013/001389SA CIC/AD/A/2013/001390SA CIC/AD/A/2013/001391SA CIC/AD/A/2013/001392SA