CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/C/2011/000300/13615
Complaint No. CIC/SG/C/2011/000300
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Complaint:
Complainant : Mr. Narender Sharma,
H. no. F- 9/8 A, Krishna Nagar,
Delhi 110051
Respondent : Dr. Mahesh Verma
Public Information Officer & Registrar,
Delhi State Dental Council,
MAIDS Complex, B.S.Z Marg,
New Delhi - 110002
RTI application filed on : 21/02/2011
PIO replied : 09/03/2011
Complaint received on : 06/04/2011
The appellant wants the following information:-
No Information sought Reply of PIO 1. Whether any inquiry has been done and A show cause notice has been sent to Dr Douji Ram, vide
any action has been taken against Dr. letter DDC/Misc. camp./2010-11/276 dated 23/02/2011. He
Douji Ram? has also been directed to send an explanation of his
negligence followed in the treatment along with a copy of
verification of his registration in the DDC.
2. What action has been taken on the Same as Q no. 1.
complaint filed by the appellant on
18/01/2011.
3 What powers and authorities does the The information sought by you is of around 7 pages
Respondent have, being the Registrar of and you are requested to submit a fee of Rs 14 ( Rs 2
Delhi State Dental Council. per page).
Ground of the Complaint:
Information provided by the PIO was incomplete, wrong and unsatisfactory. The appellant submits that he
had been pressurized to take back his RTI application by the Officials of DDC and had been misbehaved
with. The information has not been provided even after the payment of a required fee of Rs 14.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:
Complainant: Mr. Narender Sharma;
Respondent: Mr. A. K. Mishra, APIO and Mr. Praveen Khattar on behalf of Dr. Mahesh Verma, PIO &
Registrar;
The complainant was asked to pay Rs.14/- with the additional information and he paid the money
on 15/03/2011. However, the information regarding the powers of the registrar was not sent to him until
13/07/2011. The respondent claims that this was an oversight. The Complainant also alleges that he was
threatened by Mr. A. K. Mishra. The Commission has heard the recording the conversation between Mr.
Mishra and the Complainant which the complainant has played before the Commission. The Commission
does not feel that the conversation indicate that Mr. Mishra was threatening the Complainant. However,
Mr. Mishra was offering unnecessary advise that the complainant should not file RTI application. The
Commission warns all officials not to give such advice.
As regards the delay in providing the information looking at the nature of information which was to be
provided and the facts of this case the Commission comes to the conclusion that there was genuine
mistake on the part of the department which is a reflection of inefficiency. The commission warns the
department to ensure that such mistakes are not repeated. However the considering the fact that the
complainant has been made to file an unnecessary complaint before the Commission, the Commission
under Section 19(8)(b) of the RTI Act directs the PIO to send a cheque of Rs.2000/- to the complainant to
compensate him for providing the information late and the loss and detriment suffered by him.
Decision:
The complaint is allowed.
The information has been provided.
The PIO is directed to ensure that a cheque of Rs.2000/- as compensation is sent to the
Complainant before 30 September 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
22 July 2011
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (JS)