CIC: Furnish correct and complete information - CIC took a serious view of the absence of the PIO and sought a written statement explaining his absence, along with the comments of the FAA - SCN for penalty u/s 20(1) and disciplinary proceedings u/s 20(2)

O R D E R

FACTS

The Appellant vide his RTI application sought information on following points:

“Certified copies of all documents related to P-7 decision dated 16.03.2009 (i.e.processing case of making correction in the revenue record called Farad Badar) relating to Khasra No 50/8, situated in Abadi Deh of Village Humayunpur, New Delhi in the name of Smt Shanti Devi W/o Late Lakhi Ram, aged 85 yeats R/o B-4/243, Safdarjang Enclave, New Delhi-110029 be supplied to the undersigned”

2. I have not received reply on the desired information under RTI Act, 2005 contained in my application dated 20.03.3023 so far even after lapse of 50 days. As per provision contained in Sub-section (3) of section (6) of RTI Act, 2005, the information under RTI Act should invariably be provided within 30 days from the receipt of the letter.

3. In view of the above, I request the Appellate Authority to look into the matter and appeal to direct the Public Information Officer to reply the information under RTI Act, 2005 immediately failing which action under sub-section … of section 7 of RTI Act, 2005 may also be initiated against the officer found responsible for disallowing the permission and non-furnishing of information under RTI Act, 2005. An action taken report in this regard may please be forwarded to the undersigned at an early date.

Dissatisfied due to non - receipt of any response from the CPIO, the Appellant approached the FAA. The FAA vide order dated15-06-2023,upheld the reply of the CPIO. Thereafter, the Appellant filed a Second Appeal before the Commission.

HEARING:

Facts emerging during the hearing:

The following were present:

Appellant: The appellant’s representative Sant Mahinder Nath, attended the hearing.

Respondent: The respondent was not present despite notice.

The respondent remained absent during the hearing despite notice. The Appellant’s representative reiterated the contents of the RTI application and submitted that no information was furnished to him by the CPIO. The AR further stated that the appellant is a senior citizen but the respondent is harassing her by not providing information.

DECISION:

Keeping in view the facts of the case and the submissions made by the AR and after perusal of the documents available on record, the Commission directs the Respondent to furnish correct and complete information to the Appellant, free of cost, in accordance with the spirit of transparency and accountability as enshrined in the RTI Act, 2005 within a period of 21 days from the date of receipt of this order under the intimation to the Commission.

Moreover, the Commission takes a serious view of the absence of the CPIO, SDM Office Hauz Khas, Delhi despite the notice. The Commission directs him to submit a written statement before the Commission, explaining his absence, along with the comments of the First Appellate Authority, before 30.11.2023, both by post and by uploading on http://dsscic.nic.in/online-link-paper-compliance/add.

Furthermore, the Commission notes that the CPIO failed to provide the requisite information to the appellant within the stipulated timeframe as mandated by the RTI Act. Consequently, the Commission hereby seeks an explanation from the CPIO regarding why punitive measures amounting to Rs. 25,000/- (Twenty-Five Thousand Rupees) 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 disciplinary proceedings under 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 should not be initiated against him. This is in light of his failure to furnish the requisite response/information to the appellant within the prescribed RTI Act timeframe. The CPIO is required to submit his written statements both through post and via uploading on http://dsscic.nic.in/online-link-paper-compliance/add within a 21-day period from the date of receiving this order, with an intimation sent to the Commission. The Commission will take a final decision regarding the recommendation of penal action after reviewing the written submission provided by the CPIO.

The Appeal stands disposed of accordingly.

(Uday Mahurkar)

Information Commissioner

Citation: Mrs. Shanti Devi v. O/o. THE SUB-DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE, GNCTD, CIC/GNCTD/A/2023/131974-UM; Date of Decision: 06.11.2023