Copy of the Board meeting & other related information was denied - CIC: The purpose of the Act gets defeated if a citizen has to wait for the second appeal hearing to get a reply; PIO issued a strict warning with directions to provide reply within 7 days
The appellant has sought the following information:
1. Provide a copy of CBR No. 10 of Board meeting held on 24/11/2005.
2. Provide a copy of letter PDEDWC, S.No 0402/B/Cant/DE dated 20/08/2002.
3. Provide the copy of CBR No. 150 dated 18/09/2007.
4. and other related information
Grounds for Second Appeal
The CPIO did not provide any information.
Submissions made by Appellant and Respondent during Hearing:
The appellant submitted that he had not received any reply. He pressed for action against the CPIO for not providing a suitable reply. The CPIO submitted that a suitable reply was given on 06.05.2021. He further submitted that the applicant has filed writ petition no. CWP 1825 of 2020 and he has already filed the documents along-with the writ petition. The Cantonment Board also filed the reply with all documents before the Hon’ble High Court and also submitted all the documents which are related under the RTI Act.
The Commission took serious note of the unnecessary delay in providing the reply. The purpose of the Act gets defeated if a citizen has to wait for the second appeal hearing to get a reply from the CPIO. Moreover, the reply dated 06.05.2021 was also not available on record. The CPIO is accordingly issued a strict warning for not providing a reply on time. Further, he is cautioned to be careful in future and send written submissions to the Commission in advance of the hearing.
In view of the above observations, the CPIO is directed to provide a point-wise reply to the appellant within 7 days from the date of receipt of the order. The Respondent is also cautioned to exercise due care in future to ensure that correct and complete information is furnished timely to the RTI applicant(s) as per provisions of the Act failing which penal proceedings under Section 20 shall be initiated.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Vanaja N. Sarna
Citation: Sanjay v. Chief Executive Officer Office of the Cantonment Board 229 Race Course Road, Ambala Cantt in File no.: - CIC/IARMY/A/2019/129849, Date of Decision: 12/05/2021