Reasons for not reflecting the TDS related information - PIO: The query raised by the appellant is not specific and is not covered within the definition of ‘information’ under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act - CIC: PIO is not obliged to draw any inference

O R D E R

1. The appellant filed an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Director General Of Income Tax (HRD), New Delhi seeking following information:-

“What base TDS deposited by naraina industrial estate head post office having Tan no-DELNO5868C NOT REFLECTED IN INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT.”

2. The CPIO responded on 08-05-2019. The appellant filed the first appeal dated 13-12-2018 which was not disposed of by the first appellate authority. Thereafter, he filed a second appeal u/Section 19(3) A second appeal against the decision under sub-section (1) shall lie within ninety days from the date on which the decision should have been made or was actually received, with the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission: Provided that the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission, as the case may be, may admit the appeal after the expiry of the period of ninety days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time. of the RTI Act before the Commission requesting to take appropriate legal action against the CPIO u/Section 20 of the RTI Act, 2005 and also to direct him to provide the sought for information.

Hearing:

3. The appellant, Mr. Dinesh Kumar Saini attended the hearing through audio conferencing. Mr. Pradeep Shekhar, DCIT participated in the hearing representing the respondent through audio conferencing. The written submissions are taken on record.

4. The appellant clarified that he has sought information as to why TDS was not reflected for TAN no. DELNO5868C for the financial year in which he had filed the RTI application.

5. The respondent submitted that the query raised by the appellant is not specific and hence, it is not covered within the definition of ‘information’ u/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; “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; “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; “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; “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 2005.

Decision:

6. Upon perusal of the RTI application, it is not clear as to what is being sought by the appellant and therefore, the CPIO has rightly concluded that the query is not specific. The CPIO is also not obliged to provide clarification and interpretation of the documents to the appellant as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005. This sort of query seeking clarification from the CPIO is not covered within the definition of ‘information’ u/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; “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; “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; “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; “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, 2005. In this regard, the Commission refers to the definition of ‘information’ u/s 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; “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; “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; “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; “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, 2005 which is reproduced below:-

“information” means any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, report, 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.”

Furthermore, a reference can also be made to the relevant extract of Section 2 (j) of the RTI Act, 2005 which reads as under:-

“(j) right to information” means the right to information accessible under this Act which is held by or under the control of any public authority and includes ........”

In this context, a reference is also made to the Hon’ble Supreme Court decision in CBSE and Anr. v. Aditya Bandopadhyay and Ors, 2011 (8) SCC 497, wherein it was held as under:-

35..... “It is also not required to provide ‘advice’ or ‘opinion’ to an applicant, nor required to obtain and furnish any ‘opinion’ or ‘advice’ to an applicant. The reference to ‘opinion’ or ‘advice’ in the definition of ‘information’ in 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; “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; “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; “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; “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 Act, only refers to such material available in the records of the public authority. Many public authorities have, as a public relation exercise, provide advice, guidance and opinion to the citizens. But that is purely voluntary and should not be confused with any obligation under the RTI Act.”

Similarly, the High Court of Bombay in Dr. Celsa Pinto, Ex-Officio Joint Secretary (School Education) v. The Goa State Information Commission on 3 April, 2008 (2008 (110) Bom L R 1238) had held as 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; “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; “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; “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; “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; -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; The definition cannot include within its fold answers to the question why which would be the same thing as asking the reason for a justification for a particular thing. The Public Information Authorities cannot expect to communicate to the citizen the reason why a certain thing was done or not done in the sense of a justification because the citizen makes a requisition about information. Justifications are matter within the domain of adjudicating authorities and cannot properly be classified as information.” The definition cannot include within its fold answers to the question why which would be the same thing as asking the reason for a justification for a particular thing. The Public Information Authorities cannot expect to communicate to the citizen the reason why a certain thing was done or not done in the sense of a justification because the citizen makes a requisition about information. Justifications are matter within the domain of adjudicating authorities and cannot properly be classified as information.”

7. As regards the grievance of the appellant regarding reasons for not reflecting the TDS related information, this Commission further observes that the framework of the RTI Act, 2005 restricts the jurisdiction of the Commission to provide a ruling on the issues pertaining to access/right to information and to venture into the merits of a case or redressal of grievance. The Commission in a plethora of decisions including Shri Vikram Singh v. Delhi Police, North East District, CIC/SS/A/2011/001615 dated 17.02.2012 Sh. Triveni Prasad Bahuguna v. LIC of India, Lucknow CIC/DS/A/2012/000906 dated 06.09.2012, Mr. H. K. Bansal v. CPIO & GM (OP), MTNL CIC/LS/A/2011/000982/BS/1786 dated 29.01.2013 has held that the RTI Act, 2005 is not the proper law for redressal of grievances/disputes.

8. Also, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the matter of Union of India v. Namit Sharma in Review Petition [C] No.2309 OF 2012 in Writ Petition [C] No.210 of 2012 with State of Rajasthan and Anr. v. Namit Sharma, Review Petition [C] No. 2675 of 2012 in Writ Petition [C] No. 210 of 2012 has held as under:-

“While deciding whether a citizen should or should not get a particular information “which is held by or under the control of any public authority”, the Information Commission does not decide a dispute between two or more parties concerning their legal rights other than their right to get information in possession of a public authority. This function obviously is not a judicial function, but an administrative function conferred by the Act on the Information Commissions.”

Furthermore, the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the matter of Hansi Rawat and Anr. v. Punjab National Bank and Ors., LPA No.785/2012 dated 11.01.2013 has held as under:-

“6. The proceedings under the RTI Act do not entail detailed adjudication of the said aspects. The dispute relating to dismissal of the appellant No.2 LPA No.785/2012 from the employment of the respondent Bank is admittedly pending consideration before the appropriate forum. The purport of the RTI Act is to enable the appellants to effectively pursue the said dispute. The question, as to what inference if any is to be drawn from the response of the PIO of the respondent Bank to the RTI application of the appellants, is to be drawn in the said proceedings and as aforesaid the proceedings under the RTI Act cannot be converted into proceedings for adjudication of disputes as to the correctness of the information furnished.”

The Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in Sher Singh Rawat v. Chief Information Commissioner and Ors., W.P. (C) 5220/2017 and CM No. 22184/2017 dated 29.08.2017 has held as under:-

“7. This Court is of the view that the CIC completely misdirected itself in proceedings to distinguish between a citizen, and a citizen who is a director of a company. A citizen is not required to give any reasons for the information sought from a public authority unless such information is otherwise exempt from disclosure and is available only if the information seeker satisfies the PIO/competent authority that such disclosure is in a larger public interest. No such consideration is involved in the information sought by the petitioner; thus, the CIC was required to only examine whether the denial of the information sought was justified as being exempt from disclosure under the Act.

8. The learned counsel for respondent no.3 has also pointed out that the CIC has further directed the EPFO "to report the Commission what action was initiated against the management for legal remedies including demand for damages for obstructing the proceedings of public authority and the result of Section 7C proceedings before 9th June, 2017." This is also wholly without jurisdiction.”

The Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in Govt. of NCT v. Rajendra Prasad, WP (C) 10676/2016 dated 30.11.2017 has held as under:-

“6. The CIC has been constituted under Section 12 of the Act and the W.P.(C) 10676/2016 Page 4 of 5 powers of CIC are delineated under the Act. The CIC being a statutory body has to act strictly within the confines of the Act and is neither required to nor has the jurisdiction to examine any other controversy or disputes.

7 . In the present case, it is apparent that CIC had decided issues which were plainly outside the scope of the jurisdiction of CIC under the Act. The limited scope of examination by the CIC was:

(i) whether the information sought for by the respondent was provided to him;

(ii) if the same was denied, whether such denial was justified;

(iii) whether any punitive action was required to be taken against the concerned PIO; and

(iv) whether any directions under Section 19(8) were warranted. In addition, the CIC also exercises powers under Section 18 of the Act and also performs certain other functions as expressly provided under various provisions of the Act including Section 25 of the Act. It is plainly not within the jurisdiction of the CIC to examine the dispute as to whether respondent no.2 was entitled to and was allotted a plot of land under the 20-Point Programme.

The Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the matter of Shobha Vijender v. Chief Information Commissioner, W.P. (C) No. 8289/2016 and CM 34297/2016 dated 29.11.2016 has held as under:-

“8. It is seen from the above that the scope of proceedings was somewhat expanded. As stated hereinabove, the scope of the proceedings before the CIC was limited to making a recommendation 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 Act; however, notwithstanding the same, the CIC issued further directions such as directing the Chief Minister's Office to provide information about his initiatives pursuant to the directions issued by this Court in its order dated 03.03.2016 and to take over all the pension schemes from Municipal Corporations. The said directions were clearly outside the scope of the appeal preferred by respondent no.5.

10. It is at once clear from the aforesaid directions that the same are wholly without jurisdiction and plainly outside the scope of the CIC’s powers under the Act. The CIC is a statutory body constituted under Section 12 of the Act and has to perform its function and exercise its powers strictly in accordance with the Act. Its functions and powers are circumscribed by the provisions of the Act. Section 19 (8) - which is referred to by the CIC is limited to issuing directions for (a) requiring the public authority to take any such steps as may be necessary to secure compliance with the provisions of this Act; (b) requiring the public authority to compensate the complainant for any loss or other detriment suffered; (c) to impose any of the penalties provided under this Act; and (d) to reject the application made before it. Section 19(8) of the Act does not empower the CIC to issue any other directions except as specified therein. Clearly, the directions given by the CIC - to the Lieutenant Governor to take remedial measures to ensure strict compliance of eligibility norms in pension schemes and to obtain a comprehensive note on payment of pensions by three MCDs, and the order holding Area Municipal Counselors, their political parties and the Honorable Mayors to be accountable and responsible for following the norms prescribed for pensions are outside the ambit of Section 19(8) of the Act.”

9. In light of the factual matrix of the case and the aforesaid case-laws, this Commission comes to the conclusion that the CPIO is not obliged to draw any inference from the non-specific query raised by the appellant. Further, it is concluded that the grievance of the appellant cannot be addressed before this forum as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005. Hence, no further intervention of the Commission is required in the matter.

10. With the above observations, the appeal is disposed of.

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

Neeraj Kumar Gupta

Information Commissioner

Citation: Dinesh Kumar Saini v. Director General of Income Tax (HRD) in Second Appeal No. CIC/DGITH/A/2019/603280, Date of decision: 27-08-2020