Hypothetical queries sought against CIC under RTI
5 Apr, 2012Background
An order was passed by the High Court Delhi dated 21/05/2010 against Central Information Commission (CIC) which has been stayed by the Supreme Court. Referring to that order, the appellant sought information regarding the number and copies of the decisions, notices issued, appeal & complaints heard, actions taken on the complaints and the penalty imposed on the PIO under section 20(1) Where the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission, as the case may be, at the time of deciding any complaint or appeal is of the opinion that the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, has, without any reasonable cause, refused to receive an application for information or has not furnished information within the time specified under sub-section (1) of section 7 or malafidely denied the request for information or knowingly given incorrect, incomplete or misleading information or destroyed information which was the subject of the request or obstructed in any manner in furnishing the information, it shall impose a penalty of two hundred and fifty rupees each day till application is received or information is furnished, so however, the total amount of such penalty shall not exceed twenty-five thousand rupees: Provided that the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, shall be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard before any penalty is imposed on him: Provided further that the burden of proving that he acted reasonably and diligently shall be on the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer, as the case may be. and section 20(2) Where the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission, as the case may be, at the time of deciding any complaint or appeal is of the opinion that the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, has, without any reasonable cause and persistently, failed to receive an application for information or has not furnished information within the time specified under sub-section (1) of section 7 or malafidely denied the request for information or knowingly given incorrect, incomplete or misleading information or destroyed information which was the subject of the request or obstructed in any manner in furnishing the information, it shall recommend for disciplinary action against the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, under the service rules applicable to him. of the RTI Act, 2005 by the Information Commissioner Mr. Shailesh Gandhi. He also wanted to know that if the bench system of CIC is illegal, as per the High Court order, then the penalty imposed and the decisions issued during that time by the Information Commissioners will be valid or not. He further asked that whether the Central Information Commission is as per the Indian Constitution and what action will be taken against the CIC if they do not comply with the decisions of the High Court. The Public Information Officer (PIO) denied the information stating that no specific information has been sought and details sought are not information as defined under section 2(f) “information” means any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic form and information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force; of the RTI Act.
View of CIC
The Central Information Commission rejected the appeal observing that the appellant was expecting the PIO to interpret the laws and give his interpretation. The Commission also stated that the matters sought for were not on any record and thus no specific information could have been provided by the PIO.
Citation: Mr. Kuldeep Singh Yadav v. Central Information Commission in Decision No. CIC/SM/A/2011/002543/SG/17723
RTI Citation : RTIFI/2012/CIC/193
Click here to view original RTI order of Court / Information Commission