Respondent could not explain as to why the appellant was advised to inspect the relevant documents instead of providing the copies as sought - Respondent admitted that the information sought was not voluminous - CIC: Provide the copies free of cost
1. The appellant filed an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Punjab & Sind Bank, RTI Cell, Rajendra Place, New Delhi seeking information on three points, including, inter-alia,
(i) copies of allotment orders regarding Car No. DL 2CAL 3643 since April, 2010,
(ii) names of officers who held this car from 06.04.2010 to 31.03.2016 and
(iii) photo copies of bills of repairs of this car w.e.f. 01.04.2011 to 31.03.2016 and names of the officers who got the car repaired.
2. The appellant filed a second appeal before the Commission on the grounds that the CPIO did not provide copies of documents sought on point nos. 2 and 3 of the RTI application with malafide intention and instead offered inspection of the documents. The appellant requested the Commission to consider his appeal urgently so that he may obtain photo copies of documents sought by him.
3. The appellant was not present despite notice. The respondent Shri Tej Prakash Gupta, AGM, Punjab & Sind Bank, Rajendra Place, New Delhi was present in person.
4. The respondent submitted that point wise reply was furnished to the appellant vide letter dated 18.07.2016. As regards point nos. 2 and 3 of the RTI application, the appellant was advised to inspect the documents pertaining to the information sought by him. The respondent further submitted that the FAA vide order dated 19.08.2016 had concurred the reply of the CPIO. The respondent, however, could not explain as to why instead of providing the copies of the documents sought, the appellant was advised to inspect the relevant documents relating to the RTI application. The respondent, however, admitted that the information sought was not voluminous.
5. The Commission, after hearing the submissions of the respondent and perusing the records, directs the respondent to provide the information sought on point nos. 2 and 3 of the RTI application to the appellant, free of cost, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order
6. With the above observations, the appeal is disposed of.
7. Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
Citation: Ram Vilash Purohit v. Punjab & Sind Bank in CIC/PASBK/A/2017/108030, dated 28.03.2018