CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building, Near Post office
Old JNU Campus, Opp. Ber Sarai Market
New Delhi - 110067.
Tel : + 91 11 26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/C/2009/000276/3849
Complaint No. CIC/SG/C/2009/000276
Complainant : Mr. Pyare Mohan Sharma,
House No - 110, Bishyatiyo Ka Jat
Fathehpur Shekhawati,
District Sikar, Rajasthan
Respondent : Public Information Officer,
National Council For Teacher Education,
Northern Regional Committee,
A-46, Shanti Path,
Tilak Nagar, Jaipur - 302004
Facts
arising from the Complaint:
Mr. Pyare Mohan Sharma had filed a RTI application with the PIO at the National
Council for teachers Education, Northern Regional Committee, Jaipur on 12/01/2009 asking for
certain information. Since no reply was received within the mandated time of 30 days, he had
filed a complaint under Section 18 to the Commission. The Commission issued a notice to the
PIO on 31/04/2009 asking him to supply the information and sought an explanation for not
furnishing the information within the mandated time.
The Commission has neither received a copy of the information sent to the complainant,
nor has it received any explanation from the PIO for not supplying the information to the
complainant. Therefore, the only presumption that can be derived is that the PIO has deliberately
and without any reasonable cause refused to give information as per the provisions of the RTI
Act. His failure to respond to the Commission’s notice shows that he has no reasons for the
refusal of information.
Decision:
The Complaint is allowed.
The PIO is directed to provide the information to the Appellant before 15 July, 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 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) and Section 2 (2).
He will present himself with the written explanation to show cause why penalty should not be
imposed on him as mandated under Section 20 (1) on 3rd August, 2009 at 04:30 pm. He will also
submit proof of having given the information to the appellant.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
June 26, 2009.
(For any further communication with the Commission please mention the decision No. given at the top.)