CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building, Opposite Ber Sarai Market,
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067.
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No.CIC/SG/A/2009/002856/6118Penalty
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2009/002856
Appellant : Mr. Sunil Kumar Mishra
C/o Shri. J. P. Mishra,
HIG-87, Bank Colony,
Bharhut Nagar, Satna,
District-Satna,
Madhya Pardesh-485001,
Respondent : Dr. Vinaya Chandra Pande
then HOD of Medieval and Modern History
& Deemed PIO
Senate Hall (North) First Floor,
University of Allahabad
Allahabad
RTI application filed on : 13/08/2009
PIO replied : 20/08/2009
First Appeal filed on : 21/09/2009
First Appellate Authority order : Not mentioned
Second Appeal Received on : 06/11/2009
Notice of Hearing Sent on : 25/11/2009
Hearing Held on : 29/12/2009
Information sought:
1. Under what right name of Appellant was not sent for list of Research for session
2008-09. Provide photocopy of all orders and orders passed by Central govt. in this
regard with date of receipt (dispatch register).
2. Under what right the fellowship Bill of the Appellant was pending, provide
photocopy of concerned order/ rules/right and update status of the that Bill. If the
department pended this Bill then mention under what rights.
PIO's Reply:
CPIO, University of Allahabad requested vide letter dated 20/08/2009 to provide point wise
information to Department of Medieval & Modern History, University of Allahabad, Allahabad.
Copy of reply from this department not enclosed.
Grounds for First Appeal:
Information not provided till now.
Order of the First Appellate Authority:
Not enclosed.
Grounds for Second Appeal:
Information not provided.
Page 1 of 3
Relevant Facts
emerging during Hearing on 29 December 2009:
“The following were present:
Appellant: Absent;
Respondent: Mr. R.L.Vishwakarma, Central Public Information Officer;
The PIO shows that the First Appellate Authority had issued an order on 04/11/2009
ordering the information to be given, and that the information has been provided to the Appellant
on 26/11/2009. The PIO shows that he received the application on 17/08/2009 and forwarded it
to the holder of the information under Section 5(4) to Prof. Vinaya Chandra Pande HOD,
Department of Medieval and Modern History on 20/08/2009. On 11/09/2009 he sent the first
reminder to the custodian of information i.e. Prof. Vinaya Chandra Pande. However, received the
information form Prof. Vinaya Chandra Pande only on 26/11/2009 when he handed it over to the
appellant. Thus it appears that the delay in providing information was solely due to the refusal of
Dr. Vinaya Chandra Pande to give the information without assigning any reasons. He has in his
letter of 25/11/2009 addressed to the FAA expressed regret for the delay but has provided no
reasons for the delay.”
Decision dated 29 December 2009:
The appeal was allowed. The Commission observed that the information appeared to have been
provided.
As the issue before the Commission was of not supplying the complete, required information by
the deemed PIO Dr. Vinaya Chandra Pande within 30 days as required by the law, the
Commission issued a show cause notice to him. He was directed to present himself before the
Commission on 20 January 2010 at 4.30pm alongwith his written submissions showing cause
why penalty should not be imposed on him as mandated under Section 20 (1).
Facts leading to the show cause hearing on 25/02/2010:
As Dr. Pande could not appear before the Commission on 20/01/2010, the Commission issued
another show cause notice dated 21/01/2010 directing him to appear for a show cause hearing on
25/02/2010.
Relevant Facts emerging during Showcause Hearing on 25 February 2010:
The following were present:
Respondent: Dr. Vinaya Chandra Pande the then HOD of Medieval and Modern History and
deemed PIO;
Dr. Pande has submitted his written submissions. He has stated that on 20/08/2009 he had
received the RTI Application. From 16/09/2009 to 08/10/2009 the University had vacations. On
04/11/2009 he received a hearing notice from the First Appellate Authority for a hearing to be
held on 04/11/2009. Another date for hearing of First Appeal was scheduled on 26/11/2009. On
26/11/2009, Dr. Pande provided the information during the hearing of the First Appeal. Dr.
Pande admits that there has been a delay and states that this was because of administrative
pressures. He states that there is no malafide intention in delaying the information. Dr. Pande
request the Commission to condone the delay. Dr. Pande states that various members of the
faculty in University have not been made aware of requirements of the RTI Act. The
Commission recommends to the Vice-Chancellor of the Allahabad University to ensure that all
the faculty members and other officer of the University who have to deal with the RTI requests
are given a proper training in the provisions of the Right to Information Act. The Respondent
also points out that the Appellant has given two different addresses and another address has been
given in another communication. The Respondent believes that some check should be exercised
on those who apply under RTI. The Respondent also states that he could not be present at the
earlier hearing of the Commission since he was unwell and he has given advance information
about this to the Commission. Hence the Commission’s allegation in its letter of 21/01/2010 that
Page 2 of 3
he was defying the Commission’s order must be withdrawn. The Commission withdraws this
charge.
The Commission has not been given any reasonable cause for the delay in providing the
information. In view of this the Commission sees this as a fit case for levy of penalty under
Section 20(1) of the RTI Act. The RTI Application has been filed on 13/08/2009 and the
information should have been provided to the Appellant before 13/09/2009. The PIO had sought
the assistance of Dr. Vinaya Chandra Pande immediately on receipt of the RTI application and
the information has been provided on 26/11/2009. Thus there was a delay of 72 days in
providing the information for which no reasonable cause has been advanced.
In view of this the Commission levies a penalty on Dr. Vinaya Chandra Pande at the rate of
Rs.250/- per day of delay as per Section 20(1) of the RTI Act i.e. Rs.250/- X 72 days =
Rs.18000/-.
Decision:
As per the provisions of Section 20 (1) RTI Act 2005, the Commission finds this a fit
case for levying penalty on Dr. Vinaya Chandra Pande the then HOD of Medieval and Modern
History and deemed PIO. Since the delay in providing the information has been of 72 days, the
Commission is passing an order penalizing Dr. Vinaya Chandra Pande for Rs. 18,000/-.
The Vice-Chancellor, Allahabad University, Allahabad is directed to recover the amount
of Rs.18,000/- from the salary of Dr. Vinaya Chandra Pande and remit the same by a demand
draft or a Banker’s Cheque in the name of the Pay & Accounts Officer, CAT, payable at New
Delhi and send the same to Shri Pankaj K.P. Shreyaskar, Joint Registrar and Deputy Secretary of
the Central Information Commission, 2nd Floor, August Kranti Bhawan, New Delhi – 110066.
The amount may be deducted at the rate of Rs.4500/ per month every month from the salary of
Dr. Vinaya Chandra Pande and remitted by the 10th of every month starting from April 2010.
The total amount of Rs.18,000/- will be remitted by 10th of July, 2010.
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
25 February 2010
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)Rnj
CC:
1-
The Vice Chancellor
University of Allahabad
Senate hall, Allahabad,
Uttar Pradesh
2-
Mr. Pankaj K.P. Shreyaskar,
Joint Registrar and Deputy Secretary
Central Information Commission,
2nd Floor, August Kranti Bhawan,
New Delhi – 110066
Page 3 of 3