Appellant informed that she was unable to locate the information on the website of the public authority as no hyper-link was given in the reply - CIC: Consider the RTI application afresh and provide all the available information in the form of hard copies

Information Sought:

The appellant has sought the following information in respect of ABHOY JAN TEA CO PVT. LTD. and the associated ABHOY JAN TEA ESTATE also called ABHOYJAN TEA ESTATE:

1. Information relating to the above mentioned company and tea garden as well as copies of any documents containing mention about them.

2. Information relating to Sarba Nanda Dowerah and his family as well as copies of any documents which mention about them. Dowerah once owned the tea estate.

3. Information relating to the incorporation of the company on 5 May 1928 and copies of any documents relating to the same.

4. A list of directors and shareholders of the company in 1970 and copies of any documents relating to the same.

5. A list of directors and shareholders of the company in 1974 and copies of any documents relating to the same.

Grounds for Second Appeal

The CPIO has not provided the desired information.

Submissions made by Appellant and Respondent during Hearing:

The appellant in her second appeal while giving the background of the case had mentioned that she is filing this appeal to request for certified copies of documents which she had been assured would be sent to her by the appellate authority on e-mail. She further submitted that she had filed an RTI application for details of Abhoyjan Tea Estate which her grandfather once owned to help prove her antecedents should it become necessary to do so. As she had explained to ROC and MCA, it has become necessary for her to approach the Ministry due to domestic abuse. In October 2018, she learnt that her ex-husband filed an NRC - National Register of Citizens - application in Assam in 2015 in which he put the name of a woman he says he is married to and excluded both of their children. She is not sure what the implications of his conduct could be as no other parent she knows of has behaved in such a manner, and she is desperately trying to get papers which would help establish her own antecedents so that they are available to the children if need be.

In connection with the RTI application, the representative of the appellant submitted that she received a reply from the CPIO dated 08.03.2019 wherein it was stated that the information is available on their website and she can access the information on payment of the requisite fee. However, after accessing the website, she was unable to locate the desired information.

The present CPIO submitted that the above mentioned RTI application was handled by the then CPIO Shri Franky and not by him.

The then CPIO submitted that since he has been posted to some other office, he is not completely aware of the facts of the case, hence is unable to make any submissions. Considering the above facts, the Commission deems it appropriate to decide the case on the basis of the available documents and the submissions of the appellant.

Observations:

Based on a perusal of the record, it is noted that even though a reply was given to the appellant on 08.03.2019 whereby the appellant was requested to access their website to get the desired information, however, the same was given after a delay of almost three months. The appellant also informed that no hyper-link was given in the reply, so she was unable to locate the information on the website of the public authority. Since both the CPIOs showed their inability to make any submissions pertaining to the above mentioned RTI application, the Commission accepts the submissions of the appellant and as no information has been given to her till date apart from a letter dated 08.03.2019, the present CPIO is directed to provide complete information to the appellant in the form of hard copies and in case any of the information sought is not available with them, then a categorical reply to that effect should be given to the appellant point wise.

Decision:

In view of the above, the present CPIO is directed to consider the RTI application afresh and provide all the available information to the appellant in the form of hard copies and in case any information is not available with them, then a categorical reply to that effect should be given to the appellant. This direction is to be complied with within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of this order under intimation to the Commission.

The appeal is disposed of accordingly.

Vanaja N. Sarna

Information Commissioner

Citation: Korobi Saikia v. Registrar of Companies Shillong in File no.: CIC/ROCSH/A/2019/637435, Date of Decision: 28/10/2020