CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2010/002871/10405
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/002871
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Mr. Jitendra VATS,
244, Shriniketan, Plot No. 1,
Sector-7, Dwarka,
New Delhi-75
Respondent 1 : Public Information Officer,
Office of Asst. Electoral Registration Officer,
Government of NCT of Delhi,
AC-37(Palam), VREC Community Centre,
Sector-1, Dwarka
New Delhi
Respondent 2 : PIO SDM (E)
Old Terminal Building
Govt. of NCT of Delhi
O/o the SDM (E)
Kapashera, New Delhi 37
RTI application filed on : 17/02/2010
PIO replied : 16/03/2010
First appeal filed on : 25/03/2010
First Appellate Authority order : 30/04/2010
Second Appeal received on : 08/10/2010
Information Sought:
The appellant sought information regarding appellant’s application for voter’s card. The queries are:
1. Please provide with the detailed procedure including which official has which responsibility and within
what time should the action be done by each of those individual officials for issuing a Voter Card.
2. Inform the status of the procedure of appellant’s application for Voter card presently.
3. Specify the reason for the delay of more than a year in the issue of appellant’s Voter card.
4. Please mention the names and designations of the officials who are responsible for the delay in the
issue of appellant’s Voter Card.
5. A copy of relevant page of electoral roll of Part 87 AC-37 showing appellant’s name, photo and other
particulars may be provided.
6. Mention the time-period and the procedure through which appellant would get the voter 1-card.
Reply of PIO:
1. First the 001/002 is issued to the elector from VREC so that he can check all the details including,
name, address, age etc. After checking all the details the elector verifies and submit the form
001/002 along with his/her address and photo ID PROOF. After signing and submission of that
form to the official for office record/dairy of 001/002 the concerned official issues the card after
taking permission of office in-charge/AERO to the concerned elector on the same day or a day
after the submission of form 001/002.
Page 1 of 2
2. If you have already taken form 001/002 from the VREC then the I- CARD will be issued to you
within the above procedure and if not then you have to follow the procedure.
3. As the cards earlier issued to the electors were printed and provided to us by WEBEL, but the
cards in question were not given to us by WEBEL Company.
4. No such official are responsible.
5. Copy Enclosed.
6. According to the date announced by O/o CEO and within the procedure.
First Appeal:
CPIO has given insufficient, vague, misleading & irrelevant information.
Order of the FAA:
FAA ordered, “The undersigned has gone through the Application filed before the P1O/SDM (E) and
reply furnished to the Applicant. I am not satisfied with the information provided by the ERO. AERO- 37
directed to provide proper, complete & correct information to all the queries of the Appellant within one
week.”
Ground of the Second Appeal:
No information given by PIO after FAA’s Order.
Decision:
The appellant has stated that inspite of the categorical order of the FAA, the PIO did not
provide any information to the appellant.
The Appeal is allowed.
The PIO SDM (E) is directed to provide the ‘proper, complete and correct information to
all the queries’ as per the order of the FAA before 30 December 2010.
From the facts before the Commission it appears 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. He has further refused to obey the orders of his superior officer, which raises
a reasonable doubt that the denial of information may also be malafide. The First Appellate Authority has
clearly ordered the information to be given. 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.
He will give his written submissions showing cause why penalty should not be imposed on him as
mandated under Section 20 (1) before 5 January, 2011. He will also send the information sent to the
appellant as per this decision and submit speed post receipt as proof of having sent the information
to the appellant.
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
13 December 2010
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (PBR)
Page 2 of 2