CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building, Opposite Ber Sarai Market,
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067.
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No.CIC/SG/A/2010/000140/6966
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/000140
Appellant : Mr. G. C. Bhatia,
M2/C6, MIG Flats,
Jhulelal Apartments,
Pitampura, Delhi
Respondent : State Public Information Officer
Assistant Registrar (North West)
O/o Registrar Cooperative Societies,
Govt. of NCT of Delhi,
Parliament Street,
New Delhi-110001
RTI application filed on : 18/09/2009
PIO replied : 15/10/2009
First Appeal filed on : 03/11/2009
First Appellate Authority order : 10/12/2009
Second Appeal Received on : 13/01/2010
Notice of Hearing Sent on : 25/01/2010
Hearing Held on : 25/02/2010
Information sought:
Giving a reference in his RTI Application, Appellant sought following information:
Sl. Information Sought PIO's Reply Objections
a. The name of the official who was Dealing Asst. Asstt The name of the
required to put up the application Registrar. official was not
before the RCS and intimate the date disclosed.
of hearing to the applicant.
b. Registration number of the above 6016 dt 11/12/2008. No objection.
application under Rule 165 as
recorded in the Register of
applications received for disposal by
RCS.
c. In case the powers to adjudicate the Power had been delegated The copy of the order
application under Rule 165 have by Designation. was not provided.
been delegated by the RCS to any
subordinate officer, then the copy of
such order may be provided
d. Administrative or any other reason Question/clarifications are No reasons had been
which have prevented grant of not covered under RTI Act. given.
hearing in the matter of aforesaid
application under Rule 165.
e. The time frame within which an No time frame has been The time frame had
application u/s 165 is required to be fixed in the matter. not been disclosed.
disposed off.
f. The likely date when the matter will Questions are not covered The likely date for
be taken up for hearing. under RTI Act. hearing had not been
disclosed.
Grounds for First Appeal:
Unsatisfactory reply. Information was not provided within stipulated time.
The Appellant had objections as mentioned above.
Order of the First Appellate Authority:
The following point-wise order was passed:
a. SPIO was directed to provide the name & designation of official within 15 days.
b. The SPIO had correctly replied.
c. The SPIO was directed to provide copy of delegation of powers to Appellant within 15
days.
d. The SPIO had correctly replied.
e. The SPIO had correctly replied.
f. The SPIO had correctly replied.
Grounds for Second Appeal:
As mention above-"Objections"
Relevant Facts
emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant: Mr. G. C. Bhatia;
Respondent: Absent;
The First Appellate Authority had ordered the PIO to give the information on query-(a) & (c).
The Appellant states that this is not been done though Mr. Ved Prakash PIO was present during the
hearing.
Decision:
The appeal is allowed.
The PIO Mr. Ved Prakash is directed to provide the information on query-(a) & (c) as directed
by the First Appellate Authority to the Appellant before 10 March 2010.
The issue before the Commission is of not supplying the complete, required information by the
PIO Mr. Ved Prakash Assistant Registrar (NW)within 30 days as required by the law.
From the facts before the Commission it is apparent that the PIO 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. It appears that the PIO’s actions attract the penal provisions of Section 20
(1). A showcause notice is being issued to him, and he is directed give his reasons to the Commission
to show cause why penalty should not be levied on him.
Mr. Ved Prakash will present himself before the Commission at the above address on 06 April 2010 at
10.00am alongwith his written submissions showing cause why penalty should not be imposed on him
as mandated under Section 20 (1). He will also submit proof of having given the information to the
appellant. If there are other persons responsible for the delay in providing the information to the
Appellant the PIO is directed to inform such persons of the show cause hearing and direct them to
appear before the Commission with him.
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
25 February 2010
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)Rnj