CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
.....
F.No.CIC/AT/C/2009/000355
Dated, the 30th June, 2009.
Complainant : Shri N.P. Umapathy
Respondents : United India Insurance Company Limited
Pursuant to Commission’s notice dated 05.05.2009, this matter
came up for hearing on 30.06.2009. The CPIO, Dr.T.S. Seshadri and
the holder-of-the-information/noticee, Dr.H.N.Vijayendra, Divisional
Manager were present.
2. Following Commission’s directive dated 30.04.2009, notice dated
05.05.2009 was issued to the holder-of-the-information, Dr.Vijayendra
to show cause as to why a penalty under Section 20(1) not be imposed
on him for his failure to respond to the references made to him by
CPIO, Dr.T.S. Seshadri on 28.07.2008, 10.08.2008 and 13.03.2009 for
providing information to the RTI-petitioner, Shri N.P. Umapathy relating
to his application dated 07.07.2008.
3. Information was finally provided to the RTI-petitioner,
Shri Umapathy on 19.05.2009.
4. The following delays were noticed:-
Delay in disposal of appellant’s RTI-application dated 07.07.2008:
Event Date Delay
Complainant filed his RTI-application before the 07.07.2008
CPIO, R.O. Bangalore.
CPIO, R.O., Bangalore called for the requested 28.07.2008
information from the holder-of-the-information,
Dr.H.N.Vijayendra.
Information furnished to the appellant by the 19.05.2009 295 days
holder-of-information, Dr.Vijayendra. (28.07.2008
to
19.05.2009)
AT-30062009-22.doc
Page 1 of 3
Delay in disposal of appellant’s first-appeal dated 30.09.2008:
Event Date Delay
Complainant filed his first-appeal before the First 30.09.2008
Appellate Authority
Appellate Authority passed an order unrelated to 14.10.2008
the appellant’s first-appeal / RTI-application
Appellate Authority furnished relevant information 16.04.2008 197 days
to the complainant (30.09.2008
to
16.04.2008)
5. Through his reply dated 20.05.2009, the holder-of-the
information / noticee, Dr.H.N. Vijayendra stated that he complied with
the Commission’s directive dated 30.04.2009 on 19.05.2009. According
to him, the delay in supplying the information to the RTI-petitioner was
on account of the fact that he took charge as Divisional Manager,
Divisional Office-II, Mysore on 21.02.2008. He received the
ommunication from the CPIO, Dr.Seshadri regarding disclosure of
information in July, 2008. It is the noticee’s plea that “as I was newly
posted to the office, I was unable to get the record called immediately
as the same was in Accounts Department. Even the Accounts Officer
was a person newly posted to the Department and he was unable to
take out the information.” He has also pleaded that he was heavily
burdened with finalization of the accounts work and submission of trial
balance, etc. which prevented him from reacting to the CPIO’s
communication in time. He has pleaded that he had a heart problem,
which was also a contributory factor to his reacting to the CPIO’s
communication late. Dr.Vijayendra finally sent information to CPIO on
19.05.2009.
6. I’m unable to accept the explanation by the noticee,
Dr.H.N.Vijayendra. As has been recorded in my interim order dated
30.04.2009, not only CPIO reminded Dr.Vijayendra repeatedly to attend
to the RTI-application, he was also instructed by the Deputy General
Manager of the United India Insurance Company Bangalore Regional
Office to promptly respond to the CPIO’s communication. In spite of
these reminders, Dr.Vijayendra chose to ignore the RTI-application
transmitted by the CPIO to him. No amount of explaining with reference
to his being new to the job, work-load and ill-health could explain the
gross dereliction of duty which occurred in this matter.
7. There is no reasonable cause to explain the delay caused by
Dr.Vijayendra in responding to the appellant’s RTI-application, nor
AT-30062009-22.doc
Page 2 of 3
there is any extenuating factor which would warrant accepting the
submission Dr.Vijayendra has made.
8. In view of the above, it is directed that the penalty @Rs.250/-
per day for 295 days, subject to a maximum of Rs.25,000/- be imposed
on the noticee, Dr.H.N. Vijayendra for delay as presented in paragraph
4 above.
9. It is directed that Dr.H.N. Vijayendra shall pay the penalty
amount of Rs.25,000/- in five monthly instalments of Rs.5000/- each
beginning with his pay of the month August-2009 as per the procedure
explained in the enclosure to this order.
10. The head of the public authority, viz. the Chairman-cum-
Managing Director is hereby directed to ensure that the above penalty
amount is recovered regularly without fail, as per the direction in
paragraph 9 above and as per the enclosed procedure regularly without
fail.
11. The head of the public authority shall submit to the Commission
a report about recovery of the monthly instalments of penalty within
one week of such recovery having been effected and the amounts
credited as per the prescribed procedure.
12. The proceeding under Sections 18 and 20 against Dr.Vijayendra
are disposed of with these directions.
13. Commission had also issued a notice to the head of the public
authority, the Chairman-cum-Managing Director for award of
compensation of Rs.10,000/- to the petitioner, Shri N.P. Umapathy on
account of the failure of the holder-of-the-information, Dr.H.N.
Vijayendra to provide the information within the stipulated time and,
due to the Appellate Authority’s failure in properly disposing of
appellant’s first-appeal. The reply of CMD, Shri G. Srinivasan dated
25.05.2009 has been received. After considering the response, it is
directed that the compensation proceedings shall be dropped.
14. Matter disposed of with these directions.
15. Copy of this direction be sent to the parties.
( A.N. TIWARI )
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER
AT-30062009-22.doc
Page 3 of 3