Certified copy of a fact-finding report and action taken was denied u/s 11(e) - CIC: FAA has also failed to point out the sheer ignorance of the PIO and has rather upheld the reply of the PIO invoking Section 8(1)(h); CIC severely admonished the PIO

Certified copy of a fact-finding report and action taken on it was denied u/s 11(e) of the RTI Act - CIC noted that the FAA has also failed to point out the sheer ignorance of the PIO and has rather upheld the reply of the PIO invoking Section 8(1)(h) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; - CIC severely admonished the CPIO for providing a misleading reply to the Appellant by invoking a non-existent exemption clause of the RTI Act

Information Sought:

The appellant has sought the following information:

1. Certified copy of the fact-finding report conducted on 23.08.2018 at JNV, Konark, Puri (Odisha) with respect to ragging of Master Ranjan Parida, S/o Chittaranjan Parida.

2. Action taken on the said report.

3. Certified copy of the entire file (both noting side and correspondence side) in which the said matter has been dealt with.

Grounds for Second Appeal

The CPIO has provided an evasive and malafide reply denying the information sought under Section 11(e) of the RTI Act and the FAA has denied the information under Section 8(1)(h) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; of the RTI Act.

Submissions made by Appellant and Respondent during Hearing:

The Appellant stated that he has received the information sought on all points of the RTI Application vide a letter dated 03.10.2020 of the CPIO only last evening. He vehemently objected to the conduct of the CPIO in having parted with all the information just prior to the hearing and stated that it is unnerving to note that action against the erring officials based on the fact finding report dated 23.08.2018 has been taken only on 01.10.2020 by way of issue of warning letter(s) as mentioned in the reply provided at para 2 of the RTI Application.

The CPIO, at the outset regretted the wrong invocation of Section 11(e) of the RTI Act in the reply dated 17.10.2018 and stated that the intention was to deny it under Section 8(1)(h) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; of the RTI Act. Further, in response to the Appellant’s contention of delay in taking action against the erring officials, the CPIO submitted that the delay in the inquiry was due to the involvement of a number of faculty members in the matter. He furthermore submitted that by virtue of the action pending on the fact finding report until 01.10.2020, information could not be provided to the Appellant as per Section 8(1)(h) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; of the RTI Act.

Observations:

The Commission observes from a perusal of the facts on record that the CPIO has grossly erred in quoting a non-existent clause of the RTI Act for denying the information sought in the RTI Application. In other words, there is no provision of Section 11(e) in the RTI Act, which effectively renders the reply of the CPIO void. It is further baffling to note that the FAA has also failed to point out the sheer ignorance of the CPIO and his flawed reply and has rather upheld the reply of the CPIO, while invoking Section 8(1)(h) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; of RTI Act for denying the information. In the grounds of Second Appeal, the Appellant has argued on the lines of Section 11 of the RTI Act, which the Commission is not taking on record since the CPIO reply itself has been deemed as void. Moreover, from the submissions of the CPIO during the hearing as well as on a perusal of the information provided now, these clearly suggest that the denial of the information under Section 8(1)(h) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; of the RTI Act was quite laboured as the inquiry appears to have been kept in a state of limbo until now, i.e only upon receipt of the notice of hearing, the fact finding report has been processed and further action in terms of issue of warning letter(s) has been taken.

Decision:

In view of the foregoing observations, the Commission severely admonishes the CPIO for providing a misleading reply to the Appellant by invoking a nonexistent exemption clause of the RTI Act. The CPIO is hereby warned to ensure that he acquaints himself well with the provisions of RTI Act and does not create a mockery of it. Any such mistakes in future will invite imposition of penalty on the CPIO as per the provisions of the RTI Act. However, the merits of the averred inquiry as called out by the Appellant during hearing, in terms of the delay aspect or the nature of action taken against erring officials cannot be adjudicated upon within the confines of the RTI Act.

The appeal is disposed of accordingly.

Vanaja N. Sarna

Information Commissioner

Citation: Usharani Pradhan v. Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti in File no.: -CIC/NAVVS/A/2019/105346, Date of Decision : 07/10/2020