CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Appeal No.2965/ICPB/2008
F. No. PBA/2008/00491
October 27, 2008
In the matter of Right to Information Act, 2005 - Section 19
[Hearing on 15.10.2008 at 12.00 noon]
Appellant: Mr. Satish Chandra Sharma
Public authority: Food Corporation of India
Mr. A.L. Sharma, AGM & PIO
Dr. S.K. Saha, DGM & Appellate Authority
Parties Present: Respondent not present.
Appellant not present.
FACTS
:
The appellant has requested certain information under RTI Act by his letter
dated 07.11.2008 addressed to the CPIO, Food Corporation of India, Zonal
Office (NE), Guwahati in respect of his TA Bill and Medical Bill. Since he did not
receive any reply from the PIO, he filed an appeal on 24.12.2007. Since he did
not receive any reply to the letter also he has filed this second appeal before the
Commission on 7.3.2008. Comments were called for vide letter dated 10.6.2008,
and no comments have been received from the FCI. However, the FCI has
forwarded one letter dated 11.3.2008 issued to the appellant in which they have
indicated number of correspondence of various dates they have received from
him. Likewise they have sent number of communication on different dates. This
case was taken up for hearing on 15.10.2008. In spite of notices sent, none
attended the hearing.
DECISION:
2. I have gone through the RTI application and other replies received in this
connection. It is noted from the communication which has been very clearly
mentioned how his TA bill and medical bill has been examined in FCI and what
amount he is entitled has been told to him. Therefore the appellant has been
paid TA and Medical Claim according to the FCI and no further information can
be given to him. However, the appellant has filed application on 7.11.2007 and
first appeal on 24.12.2007 for which PIO has not provided reply within 30 days as
stipulated under RTI Act. The AA has also not disposed of the appeal within the
prescribed time-limit of 30/45 days. I, therefore, direct the PIO to show-cause
why penalty cannot be imposed on him under section 20(1) of RTI Act and he
1
should send his explanation in a chronological manner from the time he has
received the application and the action taken by him in collecting this information
from various sources. It is reiterated here in case if the information is going to
take some more time, interim reply should be provided. The CPIO is also
expected to invoke the provisions of section 5(5) of the Act while collecting the
information so that the custodian would become the deemed CPIO. The CPIO
has not done so. Therefore he is responsible for the delay that was caused in
this case. Since no information was forthcoming, the appellant was compelled
to file application under RTI. Final decision on show-cause will be taken in the
matter after receipt of the explanation as directed above. In these lines, the
appeal is disposed of.
Let a copy of this decision be sent to the appellant and CPIO.
Sd/-
(Padma Balasubramanian)
Central Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy :
(Prem Singh Sagar)
Under Secretary & Assistant Registrar
Address of parties :
1. Mr. A.L. Sharma, AGM & PIO, Food Corporation of India, Zonal Office,
(NE), Guwahati-7.
2. Dr. S.K. Saha, DGM & Appellate Authority, Food Corporation of India,
Zonal Office, (NE), Guwahati-7.
3. Mr. Satish Chandra Sharma, Hatigaon, Bye Lane, Janpath, H.No. 159,
Guwahati-781038
2