CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Appeal No. CIC/WB/A/2007/00538 dated 23-4-2007
Right to Information Act 2005 - Section 19
Appellant: Shri P.N. Bulli
Respondent: President's Sectt
FACTS
By an application of 29-12-06 Shri P.N. Bulli, advocate of Farbidabad
applied to the President’s Secretariat seeking information on action taken on
his earlier applications seeking action on a property dispute.
To this he received a reply on 8-1-07 from Shri Ashish Kalia, Under
Secretary & APIO, President’s Secretariat as follows:
“Your letters dated 1-11-06 and 28-12-06 were concerning the State of
Uttar Pradesh. On that basis we have forwarded them through our letter
Nos. P2-E-849526 dated 1-11-06 and P2-B-248380 dated 3-1-07 to the
Chief Secretary, U.P.
Under Section 6 (3) of the RTI Act 2005 your letter has been transferred
to Chief Secretary, U.P. You are advised to obtain further information
regarding your letters from the PIO of Chief Secretary, U.P.”
This was followed by another application of 12-1-07 received in the
President’s Secretariat on 17-1-07, to which Shri Kalia again replied on 19-1-
07 informing him that his communications received from time to time had
been “appropriately dealt with”. This was followed by another representation
from appellant on 29-1-07 that was also replied to by Shri Kalia on 7-2-07.
However, insisting that all these applications must be processed in
President’s Secretariat Shri Bulli moved his first appeal before Secretary,
President’s Sectt on 8-3-07, upon which Ms. Rasika Chaube, Internal
Financial Advisor and 1st Appellate Authority responded on 10-4-07 as follows:
“I have gone through the entire case and I find that as per
section 6 (3) of the RTI Act, 2005 his RTI application was
correctly transferred to the Chief Secretary, Govt. of U.P. for
necessary action sine the action did not lie with the President’s
Secretariat. The appellant was kept informed about the
movement of the papers. Hence the action taken by the PIO is
in order.”
1
In the meantime appellant seems to have received a response from
Shri Arun Singh, Special Secretary, Home (Police) Department, U.P.
Government dated 7.3.’07 informing him as follows:
“This is to inform you that no answer is available with the State
Government regarding any point raised in the application of appellant”.
Since APIO Shri Kalia had not received this information, he forwarded
another application of 30-4-07 on the same subject to the Chief Secretary,
Govt. of U.P. on 23-4-07. In response to this letter, a copy of which was
endorsed to appellant, Shri Arun Singh, Special Secretary has while enclosing
a copy of his letter to APIO Shri Kalia dated 7-3-07 replied as follows:
“I have been directed to inform that no answer is available with
the State Government regarding any point raised in the
application of appellant. So, it is not possible to give any
information on his application.”
The prayer of appellant before us in his second appeal is as follows:
“i) That subject order is factually incorrect and legally
untenable and his liable to be set-aside.
ii) That the prescribed authority be directed to the
supply the applied for information fully promptly and
properly having regard to section 7 (9) of RTI Act
2005.
iii) That the responsibility may please be fixed on erring
officials and penalty clause be invoked in the present
appeal.
iv) That any other relief which is deemed fit and proper
in the present case be awarded.
v) That this appeal be decided expeditiously as it
involves serious threats of life and irreparable
financial loss to the appellant.”
The appeal was heard on 24-9-2008. Only APIO, President’s
Secretariat Shri A.K. Kalia is present. Although informed of the date of
hearing through our letter of 10-9-08, appellant Shri P.N. Bulli opted not to be
present. Shri A.K. Kalia submitted copies of the correspondence with
Government of U.P. starting from 23-4-07 and concluding with the report of
23-5-07 from Shri Arun Singh, Special Secretary, Govt of U.P. (Home
Department), indicating that the letter of 7-3-07 was not received in the
President’s Secretariat.
2
DECISION NOTICE
In this matter appellant’s complaints, which are outside the purview of
RTI Act and concern a property dispute, were forwarded to the Chief
Secretary, Govt. of U.P. Whether the applications should have or should not
have been transferred to the Chief Secretary by the President’s Secretariat
are not the concern of the RTI Act and therefore, of this Commission, since
these applications were not RTI applications. This information was all the
information held by the President’s Secretariat that it could provide to
appellant fully, which it has indeed done.
The attention of appellant Shri Bulli is invited to Section 2 (j) of
the Act, which defines the information, access to which every citizen has a
right, as follows:
2 (j)
“right to information” means the right to information accessible
under this Act, which is held by or under the control of any
public authority and includes the right to1….
Thus, it will be seen that any applicant under the Act is to be provided
the information that is held by the Public Authority. In this case it is clear that
the information sought is not held by the President’s Secretariat, which is the
Public Authority in question and appellant Shri P.N. Bulli has been duly
informed.
The appeal is, therefore, unsustainable and is dismissed. There
will be no cost.
Announced in the hearing. Notice of this decision be given free of cost
to the parties.
(Wajahat Habibullah)
Chief Information Commissioner
24-9-2008
1
Emphasis added
3
Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against
application and payment of the charges prescribed under the Act to the CPIO
of this Commission.
(Pankaj K.P. Shreyaskar)
Joint Registrar
24-9-2008
4