Central Information Commission, New Delhi
File No.CIC/WB/C/2010/000409SM
Right to Information Act2005Under Section (19)
Date of hearing : 6 June 2011
Date of decision : 6 June 2011
Name of the Complainant : Shri Ramesh Verma
10, Bindal Dharmshala Market,
Bazar Bakilan, Hisar, Haryana.
Name of the Public Authority : CPIO, Cabinet Secretariat,
Rashtrapati Bhavan,
New Delhi.
The Appellant was not present in spite of notice.
On behalf of the Respondent, the following were present:
(i) Smt. Vandana Aggarwal, Director & CPIO,
(ii) Shri K.J. Sibichan, Under Secretary
Chief Information Commissioner : Shri Satyananda Mishra
2. Heard this case through video conferencing. In spite of notice, the
Appellant did not turn up in the Hissar studio of the NIC. The Respondents were
present in our chamber. We heard their submissions.
3. The Appellant had filed an RTI request on 26/02/2010 with the CPIO,
PMO seeking information under four points, namely, the foreign visits of Mrs.
Sonia Gandhi, the costs incurred, the benefits of her visit etc. The same was
transferred by the CPIO, PMO to the CPIO MEA on 16/03/2010 which was
further transferred to the Cabinet Secretariat on 26/03/2010. It is not clear if any
of these CPIOs provided any information to the Appellant. Consequently, he
CIC/WB/C/2010/000409SM
preferred the first appeal on 04/04/2010. It is not clear if the Appellate
Authority passed any order at his level.
4. In the second appeal, he has requested that the information be provided
free of cost and that necessary penalty must be levied on the defaulting
officers. Also, that he must be compensated suitably.
5. During the hearing, the Respondents submitted that they had transferred
the RTI application to the Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs and the Ministry of
Statistics and Programme Implementation respectively for providing the
necessary information on the assumption that Mrs Sonia Gandhi was both a
Member of Parliament and also the Chairperson of the National Advisory
Council. It seems the Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs had informed the
Appellant that the Central Government had incurred no expenditure on the
foreign visit of Mrs Sonia Gandhi during the last 10 years. However, the Cabinet
Secretariat has no knowledge if any information has bee given to the Appellant
in respect of her foreign visits as the Chairperson of the National Advisory
Council. Therefore, we direct the CPIO to provide to the Appellant within 10
working days from the receipt of this order any available information on the
costs incurred by the Government on her foreign visits in that capacity.
6. One thing is for sure that, in this case, the RTI request has been handled
rather very casually. It was originally addressed to the CPIO of the PMO. That
CPIO should have taken care to find out which exact Ministry in the Central
Government was concerned and should have transferred the application to that
Ministry or Ministries. Instead, the application was forwarded from one place to
another, resulting in so much delay. We hope that, in future, before transferring
any RTI application, the PMO would make appropriate enquiries and send the
request to the relevant public authority. In case, the CPIO is unable to identify
CIC/WB/C/2010/000409SM
the most appropriate CPIO/public authority, he should promptly return the RTI
application clearly stating that the PMO has no information nor has any
knowledge about which public authority would have it. That would save a lot of
time.
7. The appeal is disposed off accordingly.
8. Copies of this order be given free of cost to the parties.
(Satyananda Mishra)
Chief Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against
application and payment of the charges prescribed under the Act to the CPIO of this
Commission.
(Vijay Bhalla)
Deputy Registrar
CIC/WB/C/2010/000409SM