PIO: Delay is also attributable to the time taken in setting up the RTI mechanism - CIC: The NTA formed in the year 2017 cannot claim that it entailed over 5 years for the implementation of the RTI Act; Copy of order to DG & warning to PIO

O R D E R

1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 06.03.2023 seeking information as under:

“Please let me know the cut-off for NFOBC when it is about the subject Environmental Sciences. Few days back I have received RTI response from NBCFDC that they do not have information about cut-off for NFOBC and the information is available there at NTA. Hence please check my result for UGC NET December 2021 and June 2022 merged cycle along with the RTI response of NBCFDC and let me know the cut-off for Environmental Sciences when it is about NFOBC selection.”

2. Having not received any response from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal on Nil. The FAA’s order, if any, is not available on record.

3. Aggrieved with the non-receipt of FAA’s order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 28.05.2023.

4. The Appellant was present during the hearing through video conference and on behalf of the Respondent, Sandeep Sharma, DD & CPIO attended the hearing in person.

5. The Appellant stated that the desired information has not been received from the Respondent till date.

6. The Respondent submitted that the reply to the RTI Application was provided on 05.09.2023 stating that –

“Under Section 2(f) “information” means any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic form and information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force; of the RTI Act, the Public Authority is required to supply information as available and existing with it. It does not cast any obligation on the Public Authority to create any information. The information sought by you is spread over many files and not specific too. Providing such information will require huge effort in creation/compliance and therefore. It is not possible to provide the information sought by you.”.

Further, it was submitted upon a query from the Commission that he is not aware if there were any CPIOs designated at the time of receipt of the instant RTI Application. He further submitted that NTA is a relatively new body and the delay in replying to the RTI Application is also attributable to the time taken in setting up the RTI mechanism.

7. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, and perusal of records, takes grave exception to the fact that no reply was provided to the instant RTI Application within the stipulated time frame of the RTI Act. Moreover, the CPIO present during the hearing has tendered a baffling submission about the RTI machinery being still under process in NTA even in the year 2023. The NTA formed in the year 2017 cannot as a public authority under the RTI Act claim that it entailed over 5 years for the implementation of the RTI Act in NTA.

Now, therefore, a copy of this order is marked to the Director General, NTA to take note of the adverse observations of the Commission in this regard. The Director General, NTA shall take necessary corrective action to ensure that the CPIOs and FAAs are instructed strictly to adhere to time stipulations prescribed under the RTI Act and at no point in time will the post of CPIO or FAA be left vacant, inundating the public authority with pending RTI Applications and First Appeal(s), thus causing a mockery of the statutory right to information enshrined upon the citizens.

Further, as regards the information sought in the RTI Application, the Commission finds that the reply provided by the CPIO is erroneous and misleading as the information regarding the cut-off marks cannot be deemed to be outside Section 2(f) “information” means any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic form and information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force; , rather the CPIO ought to have specified and restricted their reply to intimating the availability/unavailability of the cut-off marks. The CPIO is now directed to revisit and provide a proper reply to the RTI Application incorporating the available cut-of marks or categorically state the unavailability thereof. The said direction shall be complied with by the CPIO, free of cost, within 15 days of the receipt of this order under due intimation to the Commission.

For the sake of propriety, Sandeep Sharma, Deputy Director & CPIO is also hereby strictly warned to ensure in future that any document that is placed on the record of the Commission is accompanied with a proper covering letter as the Commission cannot be expected to decipher the relevancy of the documents sought to be relied upon by the CPIO without any reference or explanation.

8. The Appeal is disposed of accordingly.

Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.

Sd/-

ANANDI RAMALINGAM

Information Commissioner

Citation: Avik Paul v. National Testing Agency, Second Appeal No. CIC/NTAGN/A/2023/625942; Date of Decision: 04.11.2024