CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2010/002925/10392
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/002925
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Mr. Virender Pal Gupta
MR-19, 22, Vijay Nagar,
Bawana, Delhi – 110039.
Respondent : Mr. C. S. Nawani
PIO & PCO
Transport Department (GNCTD)
Secretariat Branch,
5/9, Under Hill Road,
Delhi - 110054.
RTI application filed on : 01/05/2010
PIO replied : 01/06/2010
First appeal filed on : 18/06/2010
First Appellate Authority order : 08/07/2010
Second Appeal received on : 13/10/2010
Sl. Information Sought Reply of the PIO
1. Number of applications received between 01/4/2010 258 applications had been received for the
to 30/04/2010 for transferring license of auto transfer of auto rickshaw.
rickshaw
2. Copy of order if any, issued from Transport No information could be given due to
Department (HQ) in this regard. departmental confidentiality.
3. Copy of order if any, issued by Anti Corruption As above.
Branch in this regard.
4. Certified copy of list of approved financer from RBI. Did not pertain to transport department.
5. Copy of the first page of TO submitted for the As it pertained to third party, information
transfer between 01/04/2010 to 30/04/2010. could not be given.
6. Copy of bill of water, phone, or electricity submitted As above.
along with application between 01/04/2010 to
30/04/2010.
7. Name of the officer who signed the documents after After transfer/renewal of permit of auto
renewal/transfer of auto rickshaw and name of the rickshaw, Motor License Officer or
authorized agency in this regard. Designated Inspector signs according to the
order of order of Higher Authority.
8. Series wise number of transfer/renewal permit done As given in para 5.
of auto rickshaw between 01/04/2010 to 30/04/2010.
9. Number of HP included/detached/Continued in Auto
Rickshaw between 01/04/2010 to 30/04/2010.
10. Copy of HPRBI registration submitted for transfer of
auto between 01/04/2010 to 30/04/2010.
First Appeal:
Incomplete information received from the PIO.
Order of the FAA:
The FAA in his order noted that the Appellant was not satisfied with the reply given by the PIO in respect
of query no. 3 to 10. He further stated that information pertaining to query no. 3 to 6 could not be given as
either it was not available or related to third party. In respect of query no. 7 to 10, he directed the PIO and
MLO(ARV) to provide the information to the Appellant.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Appellant : Mr. Virender Pal Gupta;
Respondent : Mr. R. Ramanathan, MLO on behalf of Mr. C. S. Nawani, PIO & PCO;
The PIO denied some information without giving the exemptions under Section 8(1) of the RTI
Act. He has in some cases said that it is third party information and not followed any third party procedure
as per Section -11 but used it as a device to refuse the information. In view of this the Commission directs
the PIO to provide the information on queries 2 to 10 to the Appellant.
Decision:
The Appeal is allowed.
The Commission directs Mr. Ramnathan to provide the information as directed
above to the Appellant before 30 December 2010.
The issue before the Commission is of not supplying the complete, required information by Mr. S.
K. Rai, Deemed PIO/MLO (SW) and Mr. C. S. Nawani, PIO within 30 days as required by the law.
From the facts before the Commission it is apparent that the deemed PIOs are guilty of not furnishing
information within the time specified under sub-section (1) of Section 7 by not replying within 30 days, as
per the requirement of the RTI Act.
It appears that the deemed PIO’s & PIO’s actions attract the penal provisions of Section 20 (1). A
showcause notice is being issued to them, and they are directed give their reasons to the Commission to
show cause why penalty should not be levied on them.
Mr. S. K. Rai, Deemed PIO/MLO (SW) and Mr. C. S. Nawani, PIO will present themselves before the
Commission at the above address on 11 January 2011 at 11.30AM alongwith their written submissions
showing cause why penalty should not be imposed on them as mandated under Section 20 (1). They will
also bring the information sent to the appellant as per this decision and submit speed post receipt as
proof of having sent the information to the appellant.
If there are other persons responsible for the delay in providing the information to the Appellant the
PIO is directed to inform such persons of the show cause hearing and direct them to appear before the
Commission with them.
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 2010
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (GJ)
CC:
1- Mr. S. K. Rai, Deemed PIO & MLO (SW) through Mr. C. S. Nawani, PIO;