CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2009/001873/4876
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2009/001873
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Dr. R. Kumar
Flat No. 76, Plot No. 10,
Sector - 4, Pushpanjali Enclave,
Dwarka, New Delhi - 110075.
Respondent : Mr. Vivek Raman
Public Information Officer
Indian Institute of Technology Delhi
Hauz Khas, New Delhi - 110016.
RTI application filed on : 16/04/2009
PIO replied : 14/05/2009
First appeal filed on : 21/06/2009
First Appellate Authority order : 09/07/2009
Second Appeal received on : 03/08/2009
Sl. Information Sought Reply of the PIO
1. Authenticated list of files being maintained at the As regard to authenticated list of files being
office Chairman, Director, Dy. Director, and maintained at the Office of the Chairman,
Dean of the institute in the tabulated from Director, Dy. Directors, Deans, Registrar,
including subject of the file, date of year of Assistant Registrar and CVO. Number of
opening, Date of closing, volume/no of pages, files run into thousands. To provide
classification of file or status of file. information in the format desired by the
2. Authenticated list of files being maintained at the Appellant, shall require long
office of Dy. Registrars, Assistant Registrars, disproportionate man hours and hence it
CVO, of the institutes in the tabulated form with was not possible. However, the Appellant
subject of the file, date of year of opening, Date was requested to ask specific detail, if any,
of closing, volume/no of pages, classification of or else may visit the concerned office with
file or status of file. prior appointment for inspection of records,
charges for which shall be applicable as per
the act.
3. Copy of the duties given to the authorities of the Copies of the duties assigned to the above
institutes mentioned in the question 1 and 2. officers were given.
4. Copy of duties of the following: Duties of the staff were given.
a) Stenographer to the Office of Director,
Dy. Directors, Deans, Registrar and to any
other office so defined.
b) Receipt and dispatch Clerk/Diarist
c) Assistant and UDC
5. Details of the administrative and technical Details of administrative & Technical staff
support staff allotted to various departments and were given.
centers of the institutes as on date.
First Appeal:
Non receipt of proper information from the PIO
Order of the FAA:
The FAA in its order concurred the reply given by the PIO.
Ground of the Second Appeal:
Unfair disposal of the appeal by the FAA.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant : Mr. Ashok Panjwani on behalf of Dr. R. Kumar
Respondent : Mr. Vivek Raman, PIO
The PIO states that the Institute has not met the requirement of Section 4. The Public authority
dose not have list of all the files being used by. This was required as per the RTI ACT by
12/10/2005. The Appellant states that, “This is the case of abuse of Section 4 (1) of the RTI Act
which called for creation of formal record of files maintained in the office and it should be dealt
with very seriously.” The PIO is directed to ensure that the list of all the files is prepared and
categorized properly. This will be done before 30 October 2009 and a compliance report sent to
the Appellant and the Commission before 05 November 2009.
Decision:
The Appeal is allowed.
The PIO is directed to ensure that the list of all the files is prepared and categorized properly.
This will be done before 30 October 2009 and a compliance report sent to the Appellant and the
Commission before 05 November 2009.
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 September 2009
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)
(GJ)