CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/C/2011/000272/13176
Complaint No. CIC/SG/C/2011/000272
Complainant : Ms. Kajal alias Ruby
C/o Shri. L.G. Dass,
Advocate Dass & Co. R-2, Ritam Block,
Main Market, Shakarpur,
Delhi-110092
Respondent : Public Information Officer (East),
O/o the District Judge-VI (East),
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
Facts
arising from the Complaint:
The Complainant had filed a RTI application dated 01/11/2010 with the PIO, District Court at
Karkardooma Courts, Shahdara, Delhi asking for certain information. However, on not having received
the information within the mandated time, the Complainant filed a complaint under Section 18 of the
RTI Act before this Commission. On this basis, the Commission issued a notice to the Respondent PIO,
on 07/04/2011 with a direction to provide the information to the Complainant and further sought an
explanation for not furnishing the information within the mandated time.
The Commission is in receipt of the submissions of the Respondent vide letter dated 05/05/2011
wherein it has been stated that the RTI application sought certain information with respect to a summon
issued by the Court of Ms. Savitri, Ld. MM KKD Courts and which was not enclosed by the
Complainant with her application dated 01/11/2010. It is further stated that the aforesaid discrepancy
was brought to the notice of the Complainant vide letter dated 16/11/2010 with the request to enclose a
copy of summon mentioned in the RTI application. A letter dated 30/11/2010 with a copy of the said
summon was duly received on 03/12/2010. It has been further stated that for processing the said
application it was sent to the concerned court of Ms. Savitri, Ld. MM, KKD courts vide letter dated
06/12/2010 which directed the Respondent to ask the Complainant to submit the original summon before
the Ld. Court. It is further stated that the Respondent vide letter dated 08/12/2010 asked the
Complainant to submit the same and on not receiving any response against the said letter the RTI
application could not be processed further.
On perusal of the records before the Commission it is observed that the Commission is in receipt
of a letter dated 16/05/2011 by the Complainant categorically stating that the original summon had been
produced before the Respondent on 05/05/2011 and requested to supply the information. It is pertinent
to note that it is inappropriate on the part of the PIO to have abstained from providing the information to
the Complainant on the pretext of non availability of the original summon while a copy of the same was
received by him on 03/12/2010. The information should have been provided within the mandated time
i.e.30 days as per the RTI Act after receiving the copy of the required document on 03/12/2010.
Decision:
The Complaint is allowed.
In view of the aforesaid the PIO is hereby directed to provide complete and specific information
with respect to the RTI application dated 01/11/2010 to the Complainant before 17th July 2011 with a
copy to the Commission.
From the facts before the Commission, it appears that the PIO has not any information within the
mandated time and has failed to comply with the provisions of the RTI Act. The delay and inaction on
the PIO’s part in providing the information, amounts to willful disobedience of the Commission’s
direction and also raises a reasonable doubt that the denial of information may be malafide.
The PIO is directed to present himself before this Commission on 22/07/2011 at 12.00PM along
with his written submissions to show cause why penalty should not be imposed and disciplinary action
recommended against him under Section 20 (1) and (2) of the RTI Act should not be taken. Further, the
PIO may serve this notice to any other official who are responsible for this delay in providing the
information, and may direct him to be present before the Commission along with him on the aforesaid
scheduled date and time. The PIO shall also bring proof of seeking assistance from other officials, if
any.
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
29 June 2011
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(RJ)