Central Information Commission, New Delhi
File No.CIC/WB/A/2010/000324 & 520SM
Right to Information Act2005Under Section (19)
Date of hearing : 25 March 2011
Date of decision : 25 March 2011
Name of the Appellant : Shri S S Chawla
B4/337, 1st Floor, Sector - 1,
Rohini, Delhi.
Name of the Public Authority : CPIO, Central Information Commission,
2nd Floor, B Wing, August Kranti Bhawan,
Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi.
The Appellant was present in person.
On behalf of the Respondent, the following were present:
(i) Shri Tarun Kumar, First Appellate Authority,
(ii) Shri M.C. Sharma, Nodal CPIO,
(iii) Shri K.L. Das, Deputy Registrar
Chief Information Commissioner : Shri Satyananda Mishra
2. Both the parties were present during the hearing and made their
submissions. The Appellant had wanted to know about the action taken on a
complaint he had filed before the Commission regarding the noncompliance of
the CIC orders by the CPIO of the public authority concerned. The CPIO had
responded late and only after the direction by the Appellate Authority.
3. The Appellant submitted that for a long time now his complaints to the
Commission against noncompliance of the CIC orders had not been heard and
CIC/WB/A/2010/000324 & 520SM
disposed of. He further submitted that he was not also advised appropriately
about the action being taken by the Commission in these cases. Thus, even
after nearly 2 years, he was yet to know what action was being taken against
the CPIO for noncompliance of the CIC orders.
4. The CPIO submitted that the complaints filed by the Appellant against
the noncompliance of the CIC orders were not heard by the IC concerned who
wanted these to be heard by some other IC instead. When the then CIC
allocated these to an other IC, even that IC decided not to hear the cases,
presumably on the ground that some order passed by him earlier had been
challenged by the Appellant before the High Court. Thus, his complaints still
remain unresolved.
5. Out of these two cases, reportedly one case was disposed of by the IC
concerned while the other case stood transferred to the registry of the IC (DS).
Since the Appellant has been waiting for the information for such a long time,
there is a necessity to hear this case at the earliest and pass an appropriate
order. We would like to direct the CPIO to bring this to the notice of the IC (DS)
and request her to hear this case as soon as possible.
6. While parting with this case, we would like to observe that the CPIO of
the CIC must adhere to the provisions of the Right to Information (RTI) Act most
scrupulously and follow all the time lines without fail. The delay in this case is
sought to be explained on the ground that the relevant case files kept on being
transferred from one IC to another and could not be collected by the CPIO in
time. Be that as it may, all RTI requests from citizens must be dealt with
promptly and with a view to providing as much information as possible. We
hope that such delays will not be repeated in future.
CIC/WB/A/2010/000324 & 520SM
7. Two cases have been registered on the same second appeal. Both
these are disposed of 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/A/2010/000324 & 520SM