CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION Club Building (Near Post Office) Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067 Tel: +91-11-26161796 Decision No. CIC/SG/C/2010/001232/10505 Complaint No. CIC/SG/C/2010/001232 Complainant : Mr. Dinesh Yadav, Khasra No. 791, Kushak No. 2, Kadipur Village, Delhi- 110036. Respondent : Public Information Officer & Assistant Commissioner (North), Food Supplies and Consumer Affairs Department, Government of NCT of Delhi, 23-27, Shopping Complex, Gulabi Bagh, Delhi. Facts
arising from the Complaint:
Mr. Dinesh Yadav filed a RTI application with the PIO/Asst. Commissioner (NZ),
GNCTD on 09/04/2010 asking for certain information. However on not having received
the information within the mandated time, the Complainant filed a complaint under
Section 18 of the RTI Act with the Commission. On this basis, the Commission issued a
notice to the PIO/Asst. Commissioner (NZ), GNCTD on 21/10/2010 with a direction to
provide the information to the Complainant and further sought an explanation for not
furnishing the information within the mandated time.
A letter dated 18/11/2010 from the PIO/ Asst. Commissioner (NZ), GNCTD has
been received in the Commission on 25/11/2010. It has been stated therein that the
Applicant had been allotted ID No. 726 after receipt of RTI Application in the office. The
requisite information was obtained from Circle-2 and the same was forwarded to the
Applicant vide office letter no. 336 dated 02.06.2010 through UPC. Further it has been
stated that fresh information has been supplied to the Applicant after being furnished
from the APIO/FSO and the same has been enclosed for the Commission’s perusal. A
copy of the same dated 15/11/2010 has been forwarded to the Applicant as fresh response
to the Application.
The Complaint is allowed.
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/Asst.
Commissioner (NZ), GNCTD 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. The PIO has responded to the RTI Application dated
09.04.2010, after a lapse of more than 6 months, on 11.10.2010 which amounts to an
unreasonably long period of delay. It appears that the PIO’s actions attract the penal
provisions and disciplinary action of Section 20 (1) and (2) of the RTI Act.
The PIO is hereby directed to present himself before the Commission on 12/01/2011 at
03:30 PM along with his written submissions and a copy of dispatch proof of office letter
no. 336 dated 02.06.2010 that he asserts was sent in response to the RTI Application to
show cause why penalty should not be imposed and disciplinary action be not
recommended against him under Section 20 (1) and (2) of the RTI Act. Further, the PIO
may serve this notice to such person(s) who are responsible for this delay in providing the
information, and direct them to be present before the Commission along with the PIO on
the aforesaid scheduled date and time. The PIO should also bring along proof of seeking
assistance from other person(s), if any.
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,
20 December 2010
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(SC)