Information regarding the KVS teaching-staff who have been removed from service under Article 81 (D) of the Education Code - PIO: Information would have to be obtained from 25 different Regional Offices - CIC: Application of section 7(9) upheld
The appellant has sought information regarding the total number of the KVS teaching-staff who have been removed from KVS service under Article 81 (D) of the Education Code for KVS, till date.
Grounds for Second Appeal
The CPIO did not provide the desired information.
Submissions made by Appellant and Respondent during Hearing:
The appellant submitted that she is not satisfied with the reply of the CPIO as the desired information had not been provided to her. She further submitted that even though the information was not available with the CPIO, he was bound to transfer it to the regional offices u/s 6(3) of the RTI Act.
The CPIO reiterated the contents of his reply dated 13.03.2018. He further submitted that the information sought by the appellant is not available in a ready-made form and would have to be obtained from 25 different Regional Offices. Even if the RTI application is transferred to them, the information may require collation and will unnecessarily divert the limited resources of the concerned organisations.
Having heard the submissions of both the parties and after perusal of the records, it is noted that the submissions of the CPIO is justified as to obtain information from 25 regional offices, that too which is not readily available, and to collate the information so received will not only be time consuming but will also definitely divert the resources of the public authority disproportionately. Such an exercise cannot be undertaken without causing disproportionate diversion of the limited resources of the public authority.
In view of the position stated above, the Commission is of the considered view that the plea taken by the CPIO under Section 7(9) An information shall ordinarily be provided in the form in which it is sought unless it would disproportionately divert the resources of the public authority or would be detrimental to the safety or preservation of the record in question. of the RTI Act 2005 appears to be justified. As such, there is no legal infirmity either in the CPIO’s response or the FAA’s order. Therefore, the CPIO’s reply dated 13.03.2018 and FAA’s order dated 16.04.2018 are upheld being legally tenable.
However, the CPIO is directed to give an additional reply to the appellant as discussed during the hearing explaining properly why the requisite information cannot be provided to the appellant.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Vanaja N. Sarna
Citation: lndu Bhala Kashyap v. Asst. Commissioner (Vig.) & CPIO Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan in Decision no.: CIC/KVSAN/A/2018/618779/01821, Date of Decision: 10/10/2019