CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2010/003652/11357
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/003652
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Ms, Avinash Kaur,
105 A,Sector 4,
Diz Area, BKS Marg,
New Delhi 110001.
Respondent : Mr. Rajesh Kumar
APIO & Assistant Registrar (Policy)
Govt. of NCT Delhi,
Office of Registrar Cooperative Societies,
Parliament Street, Old Court Building,
New Delhi 110001.
RTI application filed on : 08/08/2010
PIO replied : 15/09/2010
First appeal filed on : 08/09/2010
First Appellate Authority order : 23/09/2010.
Second Appeal received on : 21/12/2010
Information Sought:
1. Details of the person who should get the repairing done of the entire POP falling down of the
down floor member due to leakage from the relief of the multi storey flat.
2. Details of the relevant sections of the Delhi Cooperative Society Act and Rules to report such
pesky matters.
3. Details of the procedure of such grievances when the irritant member happens to be the member of
the Managing Committee.
4. Details of the ratio and the member who has bear the cost/expenditure.
5. Details of the procedure if there is danger of life.
6. Details of the cases and the court where one could approach to file such cases. Do Civil courts
have any jurisdiction or only society tribunal can be approached.
7. Details of any other device under which the matter can be settled with respect beyond the control
of Registrar Office.
8. Details of the officer to whom the file has to be approached before approaching the court.
Reply of PIO:
1. It pertains to the society which is not a public authority and hence cannot be answered.
2- The reply is available on the department’s website and the public domain.
3, 4 & 5. the reply is available on the department’s website and the public domain ie rcs.dlhigovt.nic.in.
6, 7 & 8. opinion of SPIO is not an information however relevant provisions of DCS ACT is in public
domain and available on website rcs.dlhigovt.nic.in.
First Appeal:
Deemed refusal of information. Provision of complete information free of cost.
Order of the FAAs Order:
As per the hearing on 23-09-2010 in the presence of APIO and the appellant APIO has provided the
information technically correct he can guide the appellant to ward off his grievance. The appeal is thus
disposed off.
Ground for the Second appeal:
1 Allow present appeal.
2 Order PIO to furnish information free of cost
3 Take actions for provision of information after the mandatory period.
4 Further orders fit in the present case.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant : Dr. B. D. Mishra, Advocate representing Ms, Avinash Kaur;
Respondent : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, APIO & Assistant Registrar (Policy);
The Appellant has sought information which is not a matter of record. The appellant states that the
PIO should provide assistance and give an opinion as to how a member in the Registered Cooperative
Society can get relief for various problems faced by them. The Appellant is relying on a decision given in
appeal no. CIC/WB/A/2007/00553 dated 27/04/2007 in which the Commission has held that the PIO
should provide point wise answer sighting particular clauses answering specific question raised by him.
The Commission very respectfully disagrees with this contention since this would amount to interpreting
the law which would mean giving information which is not on the record.
The Appellant states that the answer has been delayed and the RTI application had been sent by
speed post on 08/08/2010 whereas the PIO’s reply has been dispatched on 15/09/2010 by speed post.
Decision:
The Appeal is allowed.
The information has been provided.
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 appears 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 showcause notice is
being issued to him, and he is directed give his reasons to the Commission to show cause why penalty
should not be levied on him.
He will give his written submissions showing cause why penalty should not be imposed on him as
mandated under Section 20 (1) before 25 February, 2011.
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
08 February 2011
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (ns)