CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Room no.415, 4th Floor, Block IV,
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi 110066.
Tel : + 91 11 26161796
Decision No. CIC /WB/C/2008/00028/SG/1290
Complaint No. CIC /WB/C/2008/00028/SG
Complainant : Mr. Ashok Kumar,
B-76 (Garage), S.F.S Flats,
Sheikh Sarai-I, New Delhi-110017
Respondents : Additional Commissioner (Engineering)
First Appellate Authority,
Municipal Corporation of Delhi,
Room No. 28, Town Hall,
Chandni Chowk, Delhi-110006
Public Information Officer,
Municipal Corporation of Delhi
South Zone, Green Park, New Delhi
Facts
arising from the Complaint:
Mr. Ashok Kumar had filed a RTI application with the PIO, Municipal Corporation of
Delhi, South Zone, Green Park, New Delhi on 11/12/2006 seeking information pertaining
to all the works awarded during 2001-2006 using discretionary Councilor funds by
Councilors in the south Zone of the MCD. Since no reply was received within the
mandated time of 30 days, he had filed the First Appeal before the Additional
Commissioner (Engineering) on 19/01/2007. The First Appellate Authority by his order
dated 02/02/2007 directed the Administrative Officer (South Zone) and E.E.Division
XXIV, South Zone to provide the information to the complainant. The appellant authority
further recorded in his order that
“on being asked the public purpose that such information would serve, no proper reply
could be elicited from the applicant. It was also informed that Mr. Ashok Kumar is in the
habit of asking for information which may not be pertaining to him or his area of
residence or work place etc. nor does it serve any public interest.”
Aggrieved by the aforesaid observations of the First Appellate Authority, the
complainant filed a complaint before the Commission and prayed for appropriate action
against the First Appellate Authority and also for a direction that such kind of
information is proactively provided by the MCD.
Decision
The Complaint is Disposed Off
The remarks (in italics above) of First Appellate Authority were uncalled for and
showed a poor understanding of the Act. The Complainant is not required under the RTI
Act to prove public interest at the time of seeking information. The aim of the RTI Act is
to usher in transparency and accountability in the governance. Besides the information
sought by the appellant should be voluntarily disclosed Suo Moto by the Public authority
under the requirements of Section 4 of the RTI act. The Public authority must disclose
this information under Section 4 of the Act. Voluntary disclosures of more and more
information by the public authorities is a statutory requirement under the Act, and would
indeed go a long way in ushering transparency and accountability in the system.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
January 28, 2009