Central Information Commission
CIC/AD/A/2009/001444
Dated November 20, 2009
Name of the Applicant : Dr.Parwaz Ulum Azmi
Name of the Public Authority : O/o RNI, New Delhi
Background
1. The applicant filed an RTI application dt.8.5.09 with the PIO, O/o RNI seeking
information against 10 points including the following:
i) How his letter dt.20.3.09 was taken as RTI application while he had not
enclosed the RTI fee.
ii) Efforts made to comply with the Presidential notification of 1960
iii) Whether there is any panel of translators with reference to DoPT’s OM
dt.23.11.1992 and 31.3.1994
The PIO replied on 15.6.09 furnishing point wise information. Not satisfied with the
reply, the Applicant filed an appeal dt.20.7.09 with the Appellate Authority. The
Appellate Authority replied on 9.9.09. Being aggrieved with the reply, the Applicant
filed a second appeal dt.9.10.09 before CIC stating that the PIO has violated the law
by not accepting the RTI application in Urdu .
2. The Bench of Mrs. Annapurna Dixit, Information Commissioner, scheduled the hearing
for November 20, 2009.
3. Shri S.L.Shah, APIO and Shri R.K.Sharma, S.O represented the Public Authority.
4. The Applicant was present during the hearing.
Decision
5 The Respondent submitted that a letter dt.20.3.09 in Urdu was received from the
Appellant, Dr.Parwaz Ulum Azmi. It was difficult to understand the subject matter and
the details asked for, as no Urdu knowing person is posted in RNI. However, the
enclosures sent with the letters referred to RTI in several places and therefore the
letter was obviously taken as an RTI application. Accordingly, the Appellant was
requested to send his RTI application in English or Hindi as per section 6 of the RTI
Act. In response to that, an RTI request was received from the Appellant with a fee
of Rs.10/-. Even though the request was typed in Devnagri, the language was Urdu.
In his RTI application the Appellant objected to the returning of his letter dated 2.3.09
by the Respondent and stated that a letter can be sent either in English/Hindi or in
regional language and according to the Delhi Official Language Act, 2003, Urdu is the
second working language and information(as in letter dated 20.3.09 ) can be sought
in that language also. When the Commission informed the Respondent that under RTI
an Appellant can seek information in the regional language of the area, the
Respondents submitted that facilities for translation from Urdu to English or to Hindi
were not available with the RNI till recently. However, recently, the Ministry has
created a panel of translators and in future any application in any regional language,
can be sent to the panel for translation. To the Appellant’s query on the action taken
on an OM dt.23.11.92 and 31.3.94 regarding grant of honorarium for staff for
translating from English/Hindi to regional language and vice versa, the Respondents
submitted that they are not aware of the above mentioned OMs as they are not
available on record. The Respondents also stated that the Urdu translation of the PRB
Act, 1867 is not available with in the records.
6. The Commission after hearing the submissions of both parties directs the CPIO, DoPT
to obtain the DoPT OM No.17013/3/86-Estt.(Allowances) dt.23.12.1992 and
31.3.1994 and provide any information available with the RNI on action taken on
them to the Appellant. In case the two OMs are not available even with DoPT, the
CPIO, RNI is directed to provide an affidavit stating that two OMs are not available on
record. The CPIO, RNI also to inform the Appellant about the steps taken by the
Ministry to set up a panel of translators. As for the Urdu version of the PRB Act,
1867, the same to be provided if available on records. No action in respect of
translation of the Act into Urdu needs to be taken up under RTI, in the event the urdu
version is not available.
7. Information/affidavit should reach the Appellant by 20.12.09.
8. The Appellant is directed to submit a compliance report to the Commission by
27.12.09
9. The appeal is disposed of with above directions.
(Annapurna Dixit)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy:
(G.Subramanian)
Asst. Registrar
Cc:
1. Dr.Parwaz Ulum Ami
B-518, G.T.B.Nagar
Kareli
Allahabad
2. The CPIO
O/o Registrar of Newspapers for India
West Block – 8, Wing No.2
R.K.Puram
New Delhi
3. The Appellate Authority
O/o Registrar of Newspapers for India
West Block – 8, Wing No.2
R.K.Puram
New Delhi
4. Officer incharge, NIC
5. Press E Group, CIC