Central Information Commission
CIC/AD/C/09/00218
Dated April 21, 2009
Name of the Applicant : Mr.V.P.Sharma
Name of the Public Authority : National Informatics Centre
Background
1. The Applicant filed an RTI application dt.12.2.09 with the CPIO, NIC. He
requested for inspection of various documents including his ACRs from 1996
upto 2008, his representations relating to ACR, Review/Promotion, fabrication
of records etc. The CPIO replied on 6.3.09 directing the Applicant to pay
Rs.2210 towards photocopying 1105 pages. Aggrieved with this reply, the
Applicant filed a complaint dt.27.3.09 before CIC.
2. The Bench of Mrs. Annapurna Dixit, Information Commissioner, scheduled the
hearing for April 21, 2009.
3. Mr. Zail Singh, DDG & CPIO, Mr. Swarup Dutta, Scientist ‘D’ and Mr. N.S.
Rawat, S.O. represented the Public Authority.
4. The Applicant was present during the hearing.
Decision
5. The Commission noted that the CPIO had made a reference to the
Commission vide his letter asking for clarification on how to deal with RTI
requests and is of the opinion that approaching the Information Commissioner
in this casual manner seeking advice on how to take decisions in RTI cases
only undermines the authority of and the statutory powers vested in the
Information Commissioner and warns the CPIO to avoid approaching the
Commission in this manner in future. During the course of the hearing the
Appellant pointed out that the Appellant Authority and the CPIO are of the
same rank, with the Appellate Authority being only 4 years senior to the
CPIO. While 4 years seniority may give enough experience to an officer to
perform the functions of an Appellate Authority over a CPIO of the same
rank, the Commission recommends that early action be taken to designate
an Appellate Authority senior in rank to the CPIO to ensure that the AA is
able to make best use of the stautory powers vested in him/her.
With regard to the information sought by the Appellant, the Commission
directs the CPIO to allow the Appellant to inspect the files on a mutually
convenient date and to provide certified copies of the information required by
20th May, 2009.
6. The Commission directs the CPIO to show cause why he has not bothered to
appear for the hearing and why a penalty of Rs.250/- per day should not be
imposed on him for not providing the information within the mandatory
period, as stipulated in the RTI act.
7. The appeal is disposed off.
(Annapurna Dixit)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy:
(G.Subramanian)
Asst. Registrar
Cc:
1. Mr.V.P.Sharma
Scientist-D
NIC – HQ
A-Block, CGO Complex
Lodhi Road
New Delhi 110 003
2. Mr.Zail Singh
The CPIO &
Dy. Director General
NIC – HQ
A-Block, CGO Complex
Lodhi Road
New Delhi 110 003
3. Officer in charge, NIC
4. Press E Group, CIC