CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/C/2009/000001/6934
Complaint No. CIC/SG/C/2009/000001
Complainant : Mr. Rajeev Kumar
B-26, IIT Campus
Kharagpur, West Bengal-721302
Respondent : Public Information Officer
Indian Institute of Technology
Kahragpur, West Bengal-721 302
Facts
arising from the Complaint:
Mr. Rajeev Kumar had filed a RTI application with the PIO, IIT , Kharagpur on
04/10/2009 asking for certain information. On not having received the information within
the mandated time of 30 days, he filed a complaint under Section 18 of the RTI Act with
the Commission. On this basis, the Commission issued a notice to the PIO, IIT,
Kharagpur on 01/01/2010 with a direction to provide the information to the Complainant
and further sought an explanation for not furnishing the information within the mandated
time.
The Commission has received a letter dated 02/02/2010 from the PIO, IIT,
Kharagpur wherein it has been stated that information has been provided to the
Complainant vide letter(s) dated 06/01/2010 and 01/02/2010, copies of which were
enclosed. However, from the facts before the Commission, it is apparent that here has
been a delay of about 60 days in providing the information in regard to the RTI
Application dated 04/10/2010.
Decision:
The Complaint is allowed.
The issue before the Commission is of not supplying the complete, required
information by the PIO within 30 days as required by the law.
From the facts before the Commission it is apparent that the PIO is guilty of not
furnishing information within the time specified under sub-section (1) of Section 7 by not
replying within 30 days, as per the requirement of the RTI Act. It appears that the PIO’s
actions attract the penal provisions and disciplinary action of Section 20 (1) and (2).
The PIO is hereby directed to present himself before the Commission on
19/03/2010 at 11.00am along with his written submissions to show cause why penalty
should not be imposed and disciplinary action be recommended against him under
Section 20 (1) and (2) of the RTI Act. Further, the PIO may serve this notice to such
person(s) who are responsible for this delay in providing the information, and direct them
to be present before the Commission along with the PIO on the aforesaid scheduled date
and time. The PIO should also bring along proof of seeking assistance from other
person(s), if any.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
22/02/2010
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(SP)