Central Information Commission Judgements

Dr. Anirban Kar vs Municipal Corporation Of Delhi on 23 June, 2009

Central Information Commission
Dr. Anirban Kar vs Municipal Corporation Of Delhi on 23 June, 2009
                           CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                                  Room No. 415, 4th Floor,
                                Block IV, Old JNU Campus,
                                    New Delhi - 110067.
                                   Tel : + 91 11 26161796

                                                                     Decision No. CIC/SG/C/2009/000443/3818
                                                                       Complaint No. CIC/SG/C/2009/000443

Complainant                                :        Dr. Anirban Kar
                                                    Economics Departments,
                                                    Delhi school of Economics
                                                    University of Delhi, Delhi-07

Respondent                                  :       The Public Information Officer
                                                    Municipal Corporation of Delhi
                                                    Shahdara North Zone, Delhi-110053

Facts

arising from the Complaint:

Dr. Anirban Kar had filed a RTI application with the PIO at the Municipal Corporation of
Delhi, Shahdara North Zone on 12/12/2008 asking for certain information. Since no reply was received
within the mandated time of 30 days, he had filed a complaint under Section 18 to the Commission.
The Commission issued a notice to the PIO on 13/05/2009 asking him to supply the information and
sought an explanation for not furnishing the information within the mandated time.

The Commission has neither received a copy of the information sent to the complainant, nor
has it received any explanation from the PIO for not supplying the information to the complainant.
Therefore, the only presumption that can be derived is that the PIO has deliberately and without any
reasonable cause refused to give information as per the provisions of the RTI Act. His failure to
respond to the Commission’s notice shows that he has no reasons for the refusal of information.

Decision:

The Complaint is allowed.

The Commission directs the PIO to provide the information free of cost to the Appellant before 15
July, 2009.

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) and Section 2 (2).

The Commission directs the PIO to submit written explanation to show cause why penalty should not
be levied on as mandated by section 20 (1) & (2) for defying the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005
before 20 July 2009.

Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
June 23, 2009.

For any further communication with the Commission please mention the decision No. given at the top.