CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building, Old JNU Campus,
Opposite Ber Sarai,New Delhi -110067
Tel: + 91 11 26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2009/001022/3768
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2009/001022
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Nutan Thakur, Secretary,
IRDS,5/426,ViramKhand,
Gomti Nagar,
Lucknow-226 010
Respondent : Mr. S.K.S. Yadav
PIO (Urban Development),
Office of the Chief Secretary
Delhi Secretariat
I.P. Estate New Delhi -110002.
RTI application filed on : 09.02.2009
PIO replied : Not mentioned.
First Appeal filed on : 21.03.200918.08.2008
First Appellate Authority order : 31.03.2009
Second Appeal received on : 02.05.2009
Information Sought:
The Appellant had sought for information regarding naming of different state level public
places in the regard of great person by Delhi administration.
The details of the information sought by the appellant:
1. In last 20 years, which public places has been named after eminent persons?
2. Provide category wise information regarding this.
3. And the year in which named.
4. During that period which party is in government?
5. What has basis been for naming mentioned place/road/plan?
The reply of PIO:
FAA mentioned that application was transferred by PIO of the Chief Secretary Office, to Dy.
Director, Administrative Reforms Department.
The PIO of A.R. Department transferred Appellant’s application to Secretary, PWD,
GNCTD on 20.02.09. FAA mentioned that there was no provision to transfer the Appeal to
the concerned department. He had to say that the RTI application was rightly transferred by
the PIO/CS office.
The First Appellate Authority ordered:
Request had been transferred to concerned departments.
FAA mentioned that application was transferred by PIO of the Chief Secretary Office, to
Dy. Director, Administrative Reforms Department.
The PIO of A.R. Department transferred Appellant’s application to Secretary, PWD,
GNCTD on 20.02.09.
FAA mentioned that there was no provision to transfer the Appeal to the concerned
department. He had to say that the RTI application was rightly transferred by the PIO/CS
office.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant : Absent
Respondent : Mr. S.K.S. Yadav, PIO(UD), Mr. R.K.SharmaPIO(PWD),
Mr. B.B.Popli PIO(ENC), Mr. Naresh Kumar PIO(AR)
The PIO has collated this information after a lot of efforts across the departments and
allocated over 300 man hours to collate this record. In the process they were able to offer the
information to the appellant after 42 days from the RTI Application. The PIO asked the
appellant to pay Rs.114 for the information of 57 pages. Which the appellant refuse to on the
grounds that the total time of 35day(including 5 days for transfer) had elapsed.
This case highlights the lack of knowledge about the RTI Act by PIO’s in general and the
administration is advised to find the way to training the PIO’s and various officers. Since the
information sought was not available in the collated form the PIO should have used the
provision of Section 7(9) and offered the inspection of all the files as photocopies or offered
inspection of the relevant files to the appellant. The lack of knowledge of the RTI Act led the
PIO to wasting over 300 man hours of time which could have been used in providing better
services to citizens.
However since the information was available late and the information has already been
collated the Commission directs the PIO to supply the information free of cost.
Decision:
The Appeal is allowed.
The PIO will give the information to the appellant free of cost before 25 June 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, 2005.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
18 June 2009
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)
(Rnj)