CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building, Old JNU Campus,
Opposite Ber Sarai, New Delhi -110067
Tel: + 91 11 26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2009/001036/3741
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2009/001036
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Lakhwant Singh Khera,
S/o S.Sawan Singh,
C/o Dashmesh Book Store,
Saron Road, Dhuri-148024 (Punjab)
Respondent : Mr. Vinay Kumar,ADM(HQ)/PIO,
Government ofNationalCapitalTerritory of Delhi
5, Shamnath Marg,
Delhi-110054
RTI application filed on : 28.03.2008
PIO replied : 12.05.2008
First Appeal filed on : 22.05.2008
Reply of First Appellate Authority: 22.07.2008
Second Appeal received on : 06.05.2009
The Appellant had sought for information regarding record of Revenue branch, orders passed
by the worthy Sh. L.D. Gupta Ji the then Additional District Magistrate (Rev.) Delhi.
Sl. Information Sought PIO’s Reply
1. I may be informed the ruling The details regarding retention of records of Revenue
under which period the department may kindly be obtained from the
record of Revenue branch is Coordination Branch.
preserved.
2. I may be informed the The payment on account of compensation/ex-gratia
amount of Rs 20, 000/-wide amount were disbursed during the year 1984-85 to the
pay order no, OL /A/9 1984 riot victims by the department through Pay &
209121 dated 3/5/85 which Accounts Office, Tis Hazari, Delhi and the Pay order
head adjusted. of Rs. 20, 000/-vide No.OL/A/9 209121 dated 3.5.85
in favour of Sh. Lakhwant Singh Khera issued by
S.B.I Tis Hazari Branch is to be confirmed from the
concerned PAO and action in this regard is to be taken
by the Competent Authority i.e. Office of the
concerned District (North East). Hence, the P.I.O
District North East may kindly be requested to supply
the above information.
3. I may be supplied orders The record pertaining to the orders reportedly passed
passed by the worthy Sh. by the then ADM (Revenue) on the matter in the year
L.D. Gupta Ji the than 1985 is not available in the Relied Branch of the
Additional District department as the same was issued from the Personal
Magistrate (Rev.) Delhi. Branch of the ADM
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant : Absent
Respondent : Mr. B.S. Thakur, SDM (H.Q.) On behalf of PIO Mr. Vinay Kumar-ADM(H.Q.)
No meaningful information was provided to the appellant by PIO Mr. Rajiv Kumar SDM-
II(H.Q.)/relief instead of providing information he stated in response to all three queries that
information would be available form some other PIOs. The respondent admits that so far no
other information has been provided to the appellant. The PIO Mr. Vinay Kumar is guilty of
violating the appellant’s fundamental right to information.
Decision:
The Appeal is allowed.
Mr. B.S.Thakur, SDM(H.Q.) is directed to provide the information on all the three points to
the appellant free of cost before 30 June 2009.
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 Mr. Vinay Kumar 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.
He will present himself before the Commission at the above address on 17 July 2009 at
5.30pm 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.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
17 June 2009
(In any correspondence on this decision, mentioned the complete decision number.)
(Ranjit)