Central Information Commission
Appeal No.CIC/WB/C/2007/00609, 034, 037-SM dated 04.10.2007
Right to Information Act-2005-Under Section (19)
Dated 29.01.2009
Appellant: Shri Abhay Jain
Respondent: Cantonment Board, Ministry of Defence
The Appellant is not present in spite of notice.
On behalf of the Respondents the following are present:-
(1) Sh. D. S. Khatri, CEO
(2) Sh. V. L. Tanwar, CPIO
The brief facts of the case are as under.
2. The Appellant has filed three appeals before the Commission both against
the non response on the part of the CPIO and order of the first Appellate
Authority. In these cases, he had requested the CPIO in three different letters
seeking information on a variety of issues. It is noted that he had not deposited
the requisite fee in any of these cases. The CPIO did not send him any
information nor any reply. He had filed appeal before the first Appellate
Authority in each case. In the appeals, numbering 00034 and 00037, it is noted
that the first Appellate Authority had considered his appeals and passed a joint
order dated 25 April, 2007. In his order, the Appellate Authority had held that
the Appellant had not asked for any specific information and, hence, the
information could not be given to him. In the appeal number 609, however, he
passed no order. The Appellant has approached the Commission in second appeal
in all these cases.
3. The Appellant is not present in spite of notice. However, the Respondent
submitted that the Appellant had not deposited the fee required under the law
along with his applications for information. This alone cannot be a ground for the
CPIO not to take any action on these applications. He should have advised the
Applicant to deposit the fees. In two of the cases, as stated earlier, we note that
the first Appellate Authority had argued that the information sought was not
specific and, hence, had held that it was right not to provide any information. We
find this argument unacceptable. On careful examination of the information
sought, it is noted that there is no ambiguity in the request for information and it
is quite specific both in regard to the time frame and the content of the subject.
4. In view of the above, we now direct the CPIO to provide the information
sought, in all the three cases, within 10 working days from the receipt of this
order. All information must be provided free of cost to the Appellant except those
for which the Cantonment Board has to levy a fee as per its by-laws or
regulations. We also strongly advise both the CPIO and the first Appellate
Authority to be more responsive and proactive in future in providing information
to citizens as per the spirit of the Right to Information Act.
5. With the above directions and observations, we dispose off all the three
appeals. Copies of this order be given free of cost to the parties.
(Satyananda Mishra)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied
against application and payment of the charges prescribed under the Act to the
CPIO of this Commission.
(Vijay Bhalla)
Assistant Registrar