CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office),
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067.
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2009/001625/4542
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2009/001625
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Mohan Kumar
22-F, Pocket-J/A,
Hari Enclave, Hari Nagar,
New Delhi-110064.
Respondent : Mr. Jay Chanda
Asst. Registrar & PIO
University of Delhi
Main Campus, Delhi-110007.
RTI application filed on : 31/01/2009
PIO replied : 09/02/2009
First appeal filed on : 23/03/2009
First Appellate Authority order : 27/04/2009
Second Appeal received on : 06/07/2009
Information sought:
A copy of the letter addressed to the affiliated Colleges withdrawing the earlier instructions issued by
the University of Delhi for appointment of College Librarian i.e. Non-implementation of Kathpalia
Committee Report and to follow the qualification notified by the UGC for appointment of Assistant
Librarian/College Librarian and other Library staff.
Reply of PIO
The PIO stated that the information requested by the Appellant are being requisitioned from offices
concerned and it may take some time.
Grounds for First Appeal:
Non-receipt of information from the PIO.
Order of the First Appellate Authority:
“The status of the matter was intimated to the Appellant. Under these circumstances, there is no
further actionable point in the matter.”
Grounds for Second Appeal
The CPIO not provided the appropriate information.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Appellant: Mr. Mohan Kumar
Respondent: Mr. Jay Chanda, PIO
The PIO erred by not providing information initially. It is apparent that University has not sent any
letters to the Colleges and this should have been informed to the Appellant. The PIO states that the
letters were sent to the Colleges on 11 May 2009 and he is giving photocopy of this to the Appellant
before the Commission. However the PIO has no explanation why even on 11 May 2009 this copy was
not sent to the Appellant.
Decision:
The appeal is allowed.
The information has been provided to the Appellant before the Commission.
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 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 give his written submissions showing cause why penalty should not be imposed on him as
mandated under Section 20 (1) before 10 September, 2009.
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 cost as per Section 7(6) of RTI
Ac.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
24 August 2009
(In any correspondence on this decision, mentioned the complete decision number.)
(AK)