CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Appeal No.2621/ICPB/2008
F.No.PBA/07/1466
August 6, 2008
In the matter of Right to Information Act, 2005 - Section 18/19
Appellant: Mr. T. Anil Kumar
Public Authority: Petroleum & Explosives Safety Organisation
Mr. K. Sundaresan, Controllet of Explosives & PIO
Mr. T.R. Thomas, Jt. Chief Controller of Explosives & AA
FACTS
:
By an application dated 15.9.2007, the appellant sought for various
information in 9 serials in regard to license to stock and sell liquefied petrol gas
cylinders given to one M/S Sibha Bharati Gas Services, Kollam. By a
communication dated 21.9.20907, the CPIO asked the appellant to remit a sum
of Rs.20/- towards fee which was remitted by the appellant on 27.9.2007. Since
he did not get any further response from CPIO, he filed an appeal before the AA
on 14.11.2007. By a communication dated 3.1.2008, the CPIO furnished the
information serial-wise. In the meanwhile, by a communication dated 16.1.2008,
the AA disposed of the appeal stating that on his advise, the CPIO had already
furnished the information on 3.1.2008. In the present appeal, the appellant has
contended that in spite of remitting the amount of Rs.20/- on 21.9.2007, the CPIO
did not furnish the information till 3.1.2008. He has also pointed out that even
though the CPIO had stated that license was valid only up to 30.9.2007, the
same is found to have been extended further and therefore the information given
by the CPIO was wrong. He has further alleges that the information furnished in
respect of serials 4,6,7,8 and 9 was vague and not to the point. He has further
alleged that copies of documents had not been received even though he had
remitted a sum of Rs.20 and accordingly he has sought for a direction to the
CPIO to refund the same and also for imposing penalty on the CPIO. In the
comments by the AA, he has submitted that explanation was called for from
CPIO for the delay in furnishing the information. In the explanation, the CPIO has
submitted that since the appellant had not furnished the correct name of the
licensee, it took time to trace the correct name of the licensee and due to this the
delay occurred. It is also stated that since the CPIO was not the licensing
authority, as per the records available with him, the date of the expiry of the
license was disclosed to the appellant. In the rejoinder, the appellant has pointed
out that he has furnished the address of the licensee and therefore the CPIO
could have easily ascertained name of licensee from the records available in his
office. He has also contended that before furnishing the expiry date, the CPIO
should have ascertained the correct position and furnished the same.
1
DECISION:
In the application, the appellant had sought for information in relation to a
licence granted to M/s Siva Bharat Gas Services, 29/5A Viyyur Kollam. After
asking the appellant to remit Rs 20, the CPIO did not furnish the information till
he received directions from the AA. The plea of the CPIO, as per the comments
is that the appellant had not furnished the correct name of the licencee, that is,
Mrs Saraswati Sivan, M/s Siva Bharat Gas Services. In the rejoinder, the
appellant has contended that with the address of the licencee having been
furnished, from the records/computer, the CPIO could have ascertained the
name of the correct licencee and could have furnished the information within
time. It is a clear case of delay which has to be explained by the CPIO taking into
consideration the contention of the appellant that from the records/computer, the
CPIO could have furnished the information in time. Therefore, I direct the CPIO
to show cause, within 15 days, as to why a penalty of Rs 250 per day of delay in
terms of Section 20 of the RTI Act, should not be imposed on him for the
delayed period. In so far as the correct date of expiry of the licence, in the reply
itself he had indicated that the information furnished was on the basis of the
records available with him and as such he could not be faulted to have furnished
incorrect information. The appeal is disposed of in the above terms.
Let a copy of this decision be sent to the appellant and CPIO.
Sd/-
(Padma Balasubramanian)
Central Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy :
(Prem Singh Sagar)
Under Secretary & Assistant Registrar
Address of parties :
1. Mr. K. Sundaresan, Controller of Explosives & PIO, Petroleum and
Explosives Safety Organisation, A-Block, 5th Floor, CGO Complex,
Seminary Hills, Nagpur-440006
2. Mr. T.R. Thomas, Jt. Chief Controller of Explosives & AA, Petroleum and
Explosives Safety Organisation, A-Block, 5th Floor, CGO Complex,
Seminary Hills, Nagpur-440006
3. Mr. Anil Kumar T. Thuruthiyil Hosue, Kunnathara PO, Quilandy, VIA
Calicut, Kerala-673327
2