CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Complaint No. - CIC/WB/C/2009/000312 dated 9.6.'09
Right to Information Act - Section 18 (1) (b)
Complainant: Shri A K Sharma
Respondent: Office of DIG (Pers), Pers Dte HQ DG BSF
Decision announced on Aug 5, 2010
Facts
:
The Commission has received a complaint from Shri A K Sharma of New
Delhi, who requested information from the CPIO, DIG (Pers), Pers Dte HQ DG
BSF on 29 Dec 2008. The information sought pertained to BSF vocational
deployment, a request prompted by the Complainant’s redeployment from the
BSF Engineering branch to his parent General Duty cadre. As the Respondent
did not reply within the mandated 30 days, the Complainant wrote to the First
Appellant Authority, Inspector-General (Pers), HQ DG BSF on 28 Jan 2009,
requesting intercession on his behalf.
In a letter to the Commission on 4 Feb 2009, the Complainant detailed the
chronology of his application request before stating that he had yet to receive a
reply to his RTI application. The Respondent was directed by a complaint notice
on 10 Jun 2010 from the Commission to respond.
In a letter to the Commission dated 22 Jun 2010, M Tripathi, the Dy Dir-
Gen (Pers), HQ DG BSF stated that the delay in providing the information was
due to the risk of subjudice, as the Complainant’s Writ Petition on the same
matter was being heard in the Punjab and Haryana High Courts when the
Complainant’s original RTI application was made. Shri M Tripathi added that in
the aftermath of the disposal of the matter in the High Court, the judgment was
examined by BSF HQ, and accordingly forwarded to the Ministry of Home Affairs
(MHA) for consideration. Shri M Tripathi submitted that as the Complainant’s
case file was presently with the MHA, the Respondent was not in a position to
1
release any specific information, before adding that all requisite details would be
made available to the Complainant once the file was received from the MHA.
Appended along with Shri M Tripathi’s reply to the Commission was a
letter dated 26 Mar 2009 sent by one Balbir Singh, Dy Inspector-General (Pers),
HQ BSF informing the Complainant that no Departmental action with respect to
the RTI request was feasible as the matter was subjudice. In addition, Shri Balbir
Singh advised the Complainant to await the judgment of the High Court.
Decision Notice
The Commission is satisfied that the Respondent did not malafidely deny
the Complainant’s request for information and that there was reasonable cause
for the delay in question. Besides, the BSF is an organisation listed at S. No 9 of
the Second Schedule thus placing it outside the purview of the Act u/s 24(1)
except in matters pertaining to allegations of corruption or human rights violation.
There are no such allegations in the complaint. In his application to CPIO,
complainant has merely described himself as an “aggrieved person”. In light of
the above, the present complaint is hereby dismissed.
Announced on this the fifth day of August, 2010 in open chambers. Notice
of this decision is given free of cost to the parties.
Wajahat Habibullah
(Chief Information Commissioner)
Aug 5 2010
Authenticated true copy, additional copies of order shall be supplied against
application and payment of the charge prescribed under the Act to the CPIO of
this Commission.
Pankaj K.P. Shreyaskar
Joint Registrar
Aug 5 2010
2