Relevant hyperlink has been furnished to the Appellant - CIC: When an information or record is already in the public domain, the same cannot be said to be held or under the control of public authority and it is deemed to be given to the public at large

Information sought and background of the case:

The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 01.06.2022 seeking information on following points:-

“1. Kindly provide me information related documentation of complete data of caste-based census completed by Govt of India since year 1991 until today. Please provide year-wise data. Please note, certified copies to be provided u/s 2(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 the right to- (i) inspection of work, documents, records; (ii) taking notes, extracts or certified copies of documents or records; (iii) taking certified samples of material; (iv) obtaining information in the form of diskettes, floppies, tapes, video cassettes or in any other electronic mode or through printouts where such information is stored in a computer or in any other device; “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 the right to- (i) inspection of work, documents, records; (ii) taking notes, extracts or certified copies of documents or records; (iii) taking certified samples of material; (iv) obtaining information in the form of diskettes, floppies, tapes, video cassettes or in any other electronic mode or through printouts where such information is stored in a computer or in any other device; “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 the right to- (i) inspection of work, documents, records; (ii) taking notes, extracts or certified copies of documents or records; (iii) taking certified samples of material; (iv) obtaining information in the form of diskettes, floppies, tapes, video cassettes or in any other electronic mode or through printouts where such information is stored in a computer or in any other device; “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 the right to- (i) inspection of work, documents, records; (ii) taking notes, extracts or certified copies of documents or records; (iii) taking certified samples of material; (iv) obtaining information in the form of diskettes, floppies, tapes, video cassettes or in any other electronic mode or through printouts where such information is stored in a computer or in any other device; (iii) of the act. Do not share any website link available in public domain, I don't have expertise to analyse that data.

2. Kindly provide me information related documentation of commissions / teams who worked on collecting such data as per the orders of Govt of India and also provide me details related to list of persons who worked on the caste-based census. Please provide the list of members who worked on this task and who was the authority to whom those details/reports/data was submitted. Please note, all certified copies to be provided u/s 2(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 the right to- (i) inspection of work, documents, records; (ii) taking notes, extracts or certified copies of documents or records; (iii) taking certified samples of material; (iv) obtaining information in the form of diskettes, floppies, tapes, video cassettes or in any other electronic mode or through printouts where such information is stored in a computer or in any other device; “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 the right to- (i) inspection of work, documents, records; (ii) taking notes, extracts or certified copies of documents or records; (iii) taking certified samples of material; (iv) obtaining information in the form of diskettes, floppies, tapes, video cassettes or in any other electronic mode or through printouts where such information is stored in a computer or in any other device; “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 the right to- (i) inspection of work, documents, records; (ii) taking notes, extracts or certified copies of documents or records; (iii) taking certified samples of material; (iv) obtaining information in the form of diskettes, floppies, tapes, video cassettes or in any other electronic mode or through printouts where such information is stored in a computer or in any other device; “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 the right to- (i) inspection of work, documents, records; (ii) taking notes, extracts or certified copies of documents or records; (iii) taking certified samples of material; (iv) obtaining information in the form of diskettes, floppies, tapes, video cassettes or in any other electronic mode or through printouts where such information is stored in a computer or in any other device; (iii) of the act.

3. And other related information.”

The CPIO vide letter dated 24.06.2022 replied as under:-

“Reply-After Independence, except the notified Scheduled Castes (5Cs) and Scheduled Tribes (STS), any data on Caste/Communities are not collected in Census. The Socio Economic and Caste Census 2011 (SECC 2011) was conducted by the Ministry of Rural Development (MoRD) in rural areas and by the Ministry of the Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation (MoHUPA) in urban areas under the overall coordination of the Department of Rural development. In that exercise the Office of the Registrar General, India (ORGI) furnished only the logistic and technical supports for conducting the survey. No specific information has been requested. CPIO cannot provide information in response to such a general request.

2. The Census 2011 population data (including SCs, STs & Religion) are available online at Census of India website www.censusindia gov.in at the link https://censusindia.gov.in/census.website/data/census-tables.”

Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 08.07.2022. The FAA vide order dated 02.08.2022 stated as under:-

“Reply: The CPIO has informed you that after independence, except the notified Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs), any data on Caste/Communities are not collected in Census. The available data with the CPIO related to Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Religion is already been provided to you by the link https://censusindia.gov.in/census.website/data/census-tables. You can access the same link for the data. The said data is in public domain

2. The Socio Economic and Caste Census 2011 (SECC 2011) was conducted by the Ministry of Rural Development (MoRD) in rural areas and by the Ministry of the Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation (MoHUPA) in urban areas under the overall coordination of the Department of Rural development. In that exercise the Office of the Registrar General, India (ORGI) furnished only the logistic and technical supports for conducting the survey. The SECC 2011 caste/tribe data has many technical flaws and which makes it unusable. Hence this data has not been made official for any purposes. The nodal Ministry for compilation, tabulation, classification and storage of SECC-2011 data is Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment.

3. It is also to inform that the Caste were last collected and published in 1931 Census. In 1941 Census, the details of Caste wise information were collected, but they were not published.”

Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.

Written submission has been received from the Appellant vide email dated 07.10.2024 and same has been taken on record.

Written submission dated 11.01.2024 has been received from the Sr. Research Officer (SS) & CPIO, O/o Registrar General, Delhi.

Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:

Appellant: Present via VC

Respondent: 1. Ms. Anu Bhawana, CPIO/SRO, ORGI/MHA 2. Mr. Arun Kumar, CPIO, NCBC

The Appellant stated that the relevant information has not been furnished to him till date. He stated that he has clearly mentioned in his RTI Application to provide the certified copies of all the documents sought and not the relevant website link. He relied on the decision of this Commission in CIC/DBTEC/A/2020/133004 dated 31.03.2022 wherein CPIO was directed to provide the hard copies of the information available on the website to the RTI Applicant. He stated that pointwise reply has not been furnished to him. He requested to direct the PIO to furnish information as sought.

The PIO reiterated the contents of the RTI reply and stated that relevant information has been duly furnished to the Appellant from their official record. She stated that the relevant website link has also been furnished to him. She stated that the link furnished to the Appellant is user friendly and complete data related to census 2011 is already available on website. She stated that the data related to census 2011 is voluminous in nature and it is not feasible to furnish the hardcopy of the same.

Decision:

At the outset, Commission directs the concerned PIO to furnish a copy of their latest written submission along with annexures if any, to the Appellant, free of cost via speed-post and via e-mail, within 07 days from the date of receipt of this order and accordingly, compliance report be sent to the Commission.

Commission has gone through the case records and on the basis of proceedings during hearing observes that the queries of the Appellant has been appropriately PIO. Furthermore, information sought by the Appellant is already in public domain and relevant hyperlink has already been furnished to the Appellant. Furthermore, the judgement of this Commission in CIC/DBTEC/A/2020/133004 dated 31.03.2022 as relied upon by the Appellant is not applicable in the instant case as the same is distinguishable on facts and circumstances since in the aforementioned case the PIO was not able to provide the relevant hyperlink to the Appellant and there was no mechanism to check the availability of the information sought without the CPIO’s assistance. However, in the instant case the relevant hyperlink has been duly furnished to the Appellant which can be easily accessed by the public at large.

Commission notes that that when an information or record is already in the public domain and there is a procedure for disclosure of such information, the same cannot be said to be held or under the control of public authority and it is deemed to be given to the public at large.

In this regard, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Registrar of Companies &Ors. vs. Dharmendra Kumar Garg &Ors. [W.P.(C) 11271/2009]dated 01.06.2012 had held as under:

"10. It is significant that the direction regarding dissemination of information through free or priced documents, or free or priced access to information stored on internet, electronic means, or held manually; free or on payment of predetermined cost for inspection of such documents or records held by public authorities, appear in a chapter on "obligations of public authorities". The inference from these sections is a) it is the obligation of the public authorities to voluntarily disseminate information so that "the public have minimum resort to the use of this Act to obtain information", b) once an information is voluntarily disseminated it is excluded from the purview of the RTI Act and, to that extent, contributes to minimizing the resort to the use of this Act, c) there is no obligation cast on the public authority to disseminate all such information free of cost. The Act authorizes the public authorities to disclose such information suo-motu "at such cost of a medium or the print cost price as may be prescribed", d) the RTI Act authorizes the public authority to price access to the information which it places in the public domain suo-motu.

11. These provisions are in consonance with the wording of the Section 2(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 the right to- (i) inspection of work, documents, records; (ii) taking notes, extracts or certified copies of documents or records; (iii) taking certified samples of material; (iv) obtaining information in the form of diskettes, floppies, tapes, video cassettes or in any other electronic mode or through printouts where such information is stored in a computer or in any other device; “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 the right to- (i) inspection of work, documents, records; (ii) taking notes, extracts or certified copies of documents or records; (iii) taking certified samples of material; (iv) obtaining information in the form of diskettes, floppies, tapes, video cassettes or in any other electronic mode or through printouts where such information is stored in a computer or in any other device; “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 the right to- (i) inspection of work, documents, records; (ii) taking notes, extracts or certified copies of documents or records; (iii) taking certified samples of material; (iv) obtaining information in the form of diskettes, floppies, tapes, video cassettes or in any other electronic mode or through printouts where such information is stored in a computer or in any other device; “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 the right to- (i) inspection of work, documents, records; (ii) taking notes, extracts or certified copies of documents or records; (iii) taking certified samples of material; (iv) obtaining information in the form of diskettes, floppies, tapes, video cassettes or in any other electronic mode or through printouts where such information is stored in a computer or in any other device; which clearly demarcates the boundary between an information held or under the control of the public authority and, an information not so held, or under the control of that public authority who suo-motu places that information in public domain. It is only the former which shall be "accessible under this Act" ― viz. the RTI Act and, not the latter. This latter category of information forms the burden of sub-section 2, 3 and 4 of Section 4 of this Act."

The Commission also notes that Hon'ble Delhi High Court also observed:

"9. ...Section 2(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 the right to- (i) inspection of work, documents, records; (ii) taking notes, extracts or certified copies of documents or records; (iii) taking certified samples of material; (iv) obtaining information in the form of diskettes, floppies, tapes, video cassettes or in any other electronic mode or through printouts where such information is stored in a computer or in any other device; “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 the right to- (i) inspection of work, documents, records; (ii) taking notes, extracts or certified copies of documents or records; (iii) taking certified samples of material; (iv) obtaining information in the form of diskettes, floppies, tapes, video cassettes or in any other electronic mode or through printouts where such information is stored in a computer or in any other device; “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 the right to- (i) inspection of work, documents, records; (ii) taking notes, extracts or certified copies of documents or records; (iii) taking certified samples of material; (iv) obtaining information in the form of diskettes, floppies, tapes, video cassettes or in any other electronic mode or through printouts where such information is stored in a computer or in any other device; “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 the right to- (i) inspection of work, documents, records; (ii) taking notes, extracts or certified copies of documents or records; (iii) taking certified samples of material; (iv) obtaining information in the form of diskettes, floppies, tapes, video cassettes or in any other electronic mode or through printouts where such information is stored in a computer or in any other device; of the RTI Act speaks of "the right to information accessible under this Act which is held by or under the control of any public authority.... This should mean that unless an information is exclusively held and controlled by a public authority, that information cannot be said to be an information accessible under the RTI Act. Inferentially it would mean that once a certain information is placed in the public domain accessible to the citizens either freely, or on payment of a pre-determined price, that information cannot be said to be 'held' or 'under the control of' the public authority and, thus would cease to be an information accessible under the RTI Act."

Furthermore, with regard to seeking information under Section 6 of the RTI Act, 2005 when the same is suo motu disclosed in the public domain, the Commission referred to the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the matter of Prem Lata v. CIC PA 444/2012 & CM No. 10451/2012 Decided On: 27.02.2015 wherein it was held as under:

"20. The question which in our view thus arises is, whether information which has suo motu been made available by a public authority through various means of information including internet in fulfillment of its obligation under Section 4 of the RTI Act, can be requested for under Section 6 of the Act. If the answer to the said question is in the negative then the axiomatic question which arises is, whether the CPIO to whom such a request has nevertheless been made, is obliged under Section 7 of the Act to reject the said request by stating that the information sought has suo motu been made available by the public authority on internet and can be so accessed.

21. We, for the reasons following, are of the view that neither can information already suo motu made available by the public authority in discharge of obligations under Section 4 be requested for under Section 6 of the Act nor is the CPIO required to reject the said request giving the reason of the information having suo motu been made available on the internet.

22. The scheme of the RTI Act, in placement of various Sections thereof, clearly is to in the first instance require the public authorities to suo motu make available/accessible to the public as much information (in their possession and control) as possible by placing the same in public domain including on the internet and to thereafter devise a process to enable the public to request for/seek such information from the public authorities which the public authorities have not suo motu made available. This is evident particularly from Section 4(2) It shall be a constant endeavour of every public authority to take steps in accordance with the requirements of clause (b) of sub-section (1) to provide as much information suo motu to the public at regular intervals through various means of communications, including internet, so that the public have minimum resort to the use of this Act to obtain information. It shall be a constant endeavour of every public authority to take steps in accordance with the requirements of clause (b) of sub-section (1) to provide as much information suo motu to the public at regular intervals through various means of communications, including internet, so that the public have minimum resort to the use of this Act to obtain information. It shall be a constant endeavour of every public authority to take steps in accordance with the requirements of clause (b) of sub-section (1) to provide as much information suo motu to the public at regular intervals through various means of communications, including internet, so that the public have minimum resort to the use of this Act to obtain information. supra which requires public authorities to constantly endeavour to provide as much information suo motu to the public through the medium including of internet so that the public have minimum resort to the use of the RTI Act to obtain information. The unequivocal meaning flowing thereform is that resort to the RTI Act to obtain information i.e. by requiring the public authorities under Section 5 to appoint CPIOs to deal with requests for information to be made under Section 6 is only qua the information which has suo motu not been so made available to the public by the public authority. Section 6 again provides that "a person who desires to obtain any information under this Act..." The same, read with "...so that public have minimum resort to the use of this Act to obtain information" in Section 4(2) It shall be a constant endeavour of every public authority to take steps in accordance with the requirements of clause (b) of sub-section (1) to provide as much information suo motu to the public at regular intervals through various means of communications, including internet, so that the public have minimum resort to the use of this Act to obtain information. It shall be a constant endeavour of every public authority to take steps in accordance with the requirements of clause (b) of sub-section (1) to provide as much information suo motu to the public at regular intervals through various means of communications, including internet, so that the public have minimum resort to the use of this Act to obtain information. It shall be a constant endeavour of every public authority to take steps in accordance with the requirements of clause (b) of sub-section (1) to provide as much information suo motu to the public at regular intervals through various means of communications, including internet, so that the public have minimum resort to the use of this Act to obtain information. can only mean that resort to Section 6 is permissible only for information not made available under Section 4. Unless the Act is so interpreted, the words "so that the public have minimum resort to the use of this Act to obtain information" in Section 4(2) It shall be a constant endeavour of every public authority to take steps in accordance with the requirements of clause (b) of sub-section (1) to provide as much information suo motu to the public at regular intervals through various means of communications, including internet, so that the public have minimum resort to the use of this Act to obtain information. It shall be a constant endeavour of every public authority to take steps in accordance with the requirements of clause (b) of sub-section (1) to provide as much information suo motu to the public at regular intervals through various means of communications, including internet, so that the public have minimum resort to the use of this Act to obtain information. It shall be a constant endeavour of every public authority to take steps in accordance with the requirements of clause (b) of sub-section (1) to provide as much information suo motu to the public at regular intervals through various means of communications, including internet, so that the public have minimum resort to the use of this Act to obtain information. and the words "a person who desires to obtain any information under this Act" in Section 6 would be rendered otiose.

23. It even otherwise belies logic as to why Sections 5 to 7 providing for appointment of CPIOs, making of request for information and providing of information or rejection of request for information should be read as applicable also to the information which has already suo motu been made available by the public authority to the public at large and as to why the CPIOs should be required to, in response to a request under Section 6, again provide information which the public authority has suo motu made available on internet. Any other meaning or interpretation ascribed to the said provisions would render infructuous the obligation discharged by the public authority of suo motu making information available on internet. The Legislature, while enacting Section 4, obliging the public authority to suo motu make all information available, was fully aware of the high cost entailed in so making the information made available. Section 4(1)(a), while providing for computerisation by public authorities of all records, makes the same subject to availability of resources. To hold, that notwithstanding the public authority, at a huge expense, having suo motu made information available to the public at large, is also to be burdened with dealing with request for the same information, would amount to a huge waste of resources of the public authorities. Experience of operation of the Act for the last nearly ten years has shown that the officers of the public authorities designated as CPIOs have other duties also and the duty to be discharged by them as CPIO is an additional duty. It cannot also be ignored that dealing with request for information is a time consuming process. If it were to be held that information already made available under Section 4 will have to be again provided under Sections 6 & 7, it will on the one hand not advance the legislative intent in any way and on the other hand may allow misuse of the provisions of the Act for extraneous reasons and allowing harassment of CPIOs by miscreants.

Commission deems it expedient to highlight that Hon'ble Supreme Court in Central Board of Secondary Education and Anr. Vs. Aditya Bandopadhyay and Ors, SLP(C) NO. 7526/2009 has held that :

"Indiscriminate and impractical demands or directions under RTI Act for disclosure of all and sundry information (unrelated to transparency and accountability in the functioning of public authorities and eradication of corruption) would be counter- productive as it will adversely affect the efficiency of the administration and result in the executive getting bogged down with the non-productive work of collecting and furnishing information. The Act should not be allowed to be misused or abused, to become a tool to obstruct the national development and integration, or to destroy the peace, tranquility and harmony among its citizens. Nor should it be converted into a tool of oppression or intimidation of honest officials striving to do their duty. The nation does not want a scenario where 75% of the staff of public authorities spends 75% of their time in collecting and furnishing information to applicants instead of discharging their regular duties. The threat of penalties under the RTI Act and the pressure of the authorities under the RTI Act should not lead to employees of public authorities prioritising 'information furnishing' at the cost of their normal and regular duties."

Furthermore, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of ICAI vs. Shaunak H. Satya (2011) 8 SCC 781 dated 02.09.2011 had held as under:

"26. We however agree that it is necessary to make a distinction in regard to information intended to bring transparency, to improve accountability and to reduce corruption, falling under Section 4(1)(b) Every public authority shall publish within one hundred and twenty days from the enactment of this Act,- (i) the particulars of its organisation, functions and duties; (ii) the powers and duties of its officers and employees; (iii) the procedure followed in the decision making process, including channels of supervision and accountability; (iv) the norms set by it for the discharge of its functions; (v) the rules, regulations, instructions, manuals and records, held by it or under its control or used by its employees for discharging its functions; (vi) a statement of the categories of documents that are held by it or under its control; (vii) the particulars of any arrangement that exists for consultation with, or representation by, the members of the public in relation to the formulation of its policy or implementation thereof; (viii) a statement of the boards, councils, committees and other bodies consisting of two or more persons constituted as its part or for the purpose of its advice, and as to whether meetings of those boards, councils, committees and other bodies are open to the public, or the minutes of such meetings are accessible for public; (ix) a directory of its officers and employees; (x) the monthly remuneration received by each of its officers and employees, including the system of compensation as provided in its regulations; (xi) the budget allocated to each of its agency, indicating the particulars of all plans, proposed expenditures and reports on disbursements made; (xii) the manner of execution of subsidy programmes, including the amounts allocated and the details of beneficiaries of such programmes; (xiii) particulars of recipients of concessions, permits or authorisations granted by it; (xiv) details in respect of the information, available to or held by it, reduced in an electronic form; (xv) the particulars of facilities available to citizens for obtaining information, including the working hours of a library or reading room, if maintained for public use; (xvi) the names, designations and other particulars of the Public Information Officers; (xvii) such other information as may be prescribed and thereafter update these publications every year; and (c) and other information which may not have a bearing on accountability or reducing corruption. The competent authorities under the RTI Act will have to maintain a proper balance so that while achieving transparency, the demand for information does not reach unmanageable proportions affecting other public interests, which include efficient operation of public authorities and government, preservation of confidentiality of sensitive information and optimum use of limited fiscal resources"

In view of the above, the Commission notes that an appropriate reply has been provided to the appellant by the respondent. Hence, no further intervention of the Commission is required in the matter.

The appeal is disposed of accordingly.

Heeralal Samariya

Chief Information Commissioner

Citation: Shri Prashant Vilas Dhasal v. Office of the Registrar General of India, Second Appeal No. CIC/ORGOI/A/2022/643113; Date of Decision: 18.01.2024