CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2010/001910/9006
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/001910
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Mr.Rajendra Kumar Raja Ram Gawde
D-63, Sara, Vishwakarma Nagar,
Mulund (West) Mumbai
Respondent : Ms. Nisha O. V.
Public Information Officer & Regional PF Commissioner
Ministry of Labour & Employment
Sub Regional Office Vashi,
T No 6, 5th Floor, Vashi Station,
New Mumbai – 400703.
RTI application filed on : 16/11/2009 PIO replied : 09/08/2010 First appeal filed on : 17/12/2009 First Appellate Authority order : not mentioned Second Appeal received on : 10/07/2010 Information Sought:
(a) Copies of correspondence, done with the Employer TF, BSNL, Deonar, Mumbai -, 400 088 by the PF
office and enforcement officer.
(b) Reply of the correspondence filed by the said employer to your office.
(c) . Copies of •the orders passed. by the PF Commissioner / Asst. Commissioner etc. against the said
employer, if any.
(e) (Dopy of ni1ing of P. F; Act for violation ‘of the legal provisions under the said Act and, to take
cognizance for the same may kindly be furnished.
Reply of the Public Information Officer (PIO)
Information pertain to 187 pages and hence deposit Rs.374/- to get the information.
Grounds for the First Appeal:
No information was provided.
Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
Not mentioned.
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
Unsatisfactory information provided by the PIO and Dismissal of Appeal by the FAA.
Page 1 of 2
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Appellant: Absent;
Respondent: Ms. Nisha O. V., Public Information Officer & Regional PF Commissioner
The respondent admits that the RTI application reached her office on 16/011/2009. She states that
the application did not go to the RTI application but was lying in the enforcement file since the appellant
had the matter pending there. In March 2010 the RTI application was sent to the PIO who demanded an
additional fee of Rs.374/- for providing the information. The PIO states that she provided the information
to the appellant on 09/08/2010. It is apparent that the organization has no system in place to provide the
information when RTI application is received. It is a fact that the appellant has being harassed unncesarily
and had to wait for nearly 10 months to get the information which he should have obtained within 30
days. The Commission therefore awards a compensation to the appellant for the unnecessarily harassment
he had to undergo. As per the provisions of Section 19(8)(b) the Commission awards a compensation of
Rs.1000/- to the appellant for the loss and detriment suffered by in having to file a second appeal and
waiting for 10 months for the information.
Decision:
The Appeal is allowed.
The claims that the information has been sent to the appellant on 09/08/2010.
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 of Section 20 (1). A show cause notice is
being issued to her, and she is directed give her reasons to the Commission to show cause why penalty
should not be levied on her.
She will present herself before the Commission at the above address on 28 September 2010 at 11.30am
alongwith her written submissions showing cause why penalty should not be imposed on her as mandated
under Section 20 (1). She will also submit proof of having given the information to the appellant.
If there are other persons responsible for the delay in providing the information to the Appellant the PIO is
directed to inform such persons of the show cause hearing and direct them to appear before the
Commission with him.
This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
Any information in compliance with this Order will be provided free of cost as per Section 7(6) of RTI Act.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
17 August 2010
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(YM)
Page 2 of 2