CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Room No. 415, 4th Floor,
Block IV, Old JNU Campus,
New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91 11 26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2009/000099/2676
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2009/000099
Relevant facts emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Lal Bahadur Singh Yadav,
647, Matiyara Road, Allapur,
Allahabad-211006. U.P.
Respondent : Mr. R.L.Vishwakarma,
University of Allahabad,
CPIO, Senate Hall (North), 1st Floor,
University of Allahabad, U.P.
RTI application filed on : 01/08/2008 PIO's Reply : 09/09/2008 First Appeal filed on : 22/11/2008 First Appellate Authority order : 04/12/2008 Second Appeal filed on : 07/01/2009-15/09/2008 Particular of required information:-
The appellant had asked in RTI application that, provide photocopy of answer
sheet, question sheet, answer rough sheet of the LLB from Allahabad University.
The PIO replied.
In this connection, inform to the appellant that, required information is confidential that is
why, information cannot be provided.
First Appellate Authority Ordered:
The First appellate authority had clearly ordered that the information should be provided in 2
days.
Relevant facts emerging during hearing:
The following were present.
Appellant: Mr. Lal Bahadur Singh Yadav
Respondent: Mr. R. L. Vishwakarma PIO
The PIO shows that he had issued a letter to the deemed PIO Dr. R.K. Chaubey whose assistance
he had sought for the providing the information first on 22 August 2008 when Dr. Chaubey had
replied on 8 September that the information was confidential. The PIO had again asked Dr.
Chaubey to provide the information after the First appellate authority’s order, but Dr. Chaubey
did not comply. Dr. Chaubey whose assistance was sought by the PIO as per Section 5 (4) is
therefore responsible for not providing the information to the appellant.
Decision:
The Appeal is allowed.
The complete information will be sent to the appellant before 15 April, 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.
It also appears that the First appellate authority’s orders have not been implemented.
From the facts before the Commission it is apparent that the deemed PIO Dr. R.K.Chaubey 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 present himself before the Commission at the above address on 1 May 2009 at
4.30pm 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.
This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
9th April, 2009
(In any case correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)