Central Information Commission Judgements

Mr. Sant Kumar Shukla vs Food & Supply Department on 10 December, 2009

Central Information Commission
Mr. Sant Kumar Shukla vs Food & Supply Department on 10 December, 2009
                    CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                        Club Building (Near Post Office)
                      Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
                             Tel: +91-11-26161796

                                                   Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2009/002587/5815
                                                          Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2009/002587

Relevant Facts

emerging from the Appeal:

Appellant                           :      Mr. Sant Kumar Shukla
                                           RZ- 202, Gali No. 3, Karn Vihar,
                                           Part 1 (Kirari Extension), Kirari,
                                           Delhi - 110086

Respondent                          :      Mr. Subhash Chander
                                           Public Information Officer & AC
                                           Food & Supply Department
                                           O/o the Asstt. Commissioner (N/W)
                                           Shalimar Bagh, New Delhi

RTI application filed on            :      24/05/2009
PIO replied                         :      03/07/2009, 07/07/2009 and 31/07/2009
First appeal filed on               :      29/07/2009
First Appellate Authority order     :      28/08/2009
Second Appeal received on           :      14/10/2009
Date of Notice of Hearing           :       29/10/2009
Hearing Held on                     :      10/12/2009

Information Sought:

1. Details as to whether the current office of the Food & Supplies Department No. 22 (Kiradi)
would be made permanent. If yes, then where and if not, why so?

2. Details as to the no. of staff working there and their positions and if they were being
appointed based on the population and if not what was being done regarding the same.

3. According to the current population how many fair price shops and kerosene shops should be
there and at what distance from each other?

4. Presently how many fair price shops and kerosene shops were there, and were they
constituted by the department.

5. Name and contact details of the owners of such shops are well as their location.

6. Under what category have these shops been established (like widows, handicapped, etc.) and
by whose approval?

7. The timings of these shops and whether they could be opened at midnight or early morning
by particular orders. If not, then what can the consumer do if he finds them open at such
time?

8. Can the owners of such shops allow their servants and relatives to operate the shops?

9. Presently how many AAY, BPL and APL ration cards are there? How many applications
have the department received and by when will the cards be ready, and have those cards that
have been issued been delivered to the correct addresses.

10. Have all the applicants met with the eligibility and prescribed standards and what is being
done to ensure that they meet with the requirements for BPL and APL cards.

11. Details regarding the opening of new fair price shops and kerosene shops.

12. What is the current system of distribution and details as to the apportionment of the ration,
and whether all the shops were adequately supplied?

13. Details regarding any directions issued while setting up a new shop, and if no directions are
given, then why not?

Reply of the PIO:

The PIO supplied various replies dated 03/07/2009, 07/07/2009 and 31/07/2009 enclosing
information acquired by the assistance of FSO C-23, FSO C-25, FSO C-18, FSO C-54 and FSO
C-55 regarding the information sought by the Appellant. Among these were also replies
submitted by the Admin. Branch, the Fuel Branch and the Distribution Branch.

First Appeal:

Unsatisfactory reply given by the PIO.

Order of the FAA:

The FAA observed that complete information regarding questions 1, 6, 9 and 10 had not been
provided and directed the PIO to provide complete para wise information within 20 days after
collecting the same from the General Branch and the concerned FSO.

Ground of the Second Appeal:

That the Appellant has still not been supplied with the proper information.

Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:

The following were present:

Appellant : Mr. Sant Kumar Shukla;

Respondent : Mr. Subhash Chander, Public Information Officer & AC;

The Respondent states that his office was the camp office initially which is a part of
circle no. 22 and it was move into a new office on 01 September 2009. He has since given the
information to the Appellant. the appellant however states that the information with regards to
query as to whether there is any specific proposal for setting up of permanent office has not been
provided. The PIO states that the proposal is under consideration. The PIO is directed to provide
all papers relating to the proposal including file notings as of now to the appellant.

Decision:

The Appeal is allowed.

The PIO is directed to provide all papers relating to the proposal for setting up of
permanent office including file notings as of now to the appellant before 20 December 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 of cost as per Section 7(6) of RTI Act.

Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
10 December 2009

(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(PS)