Central Information Commission
CIC/AD/A/2009/001149
Dated October 30, 2009
Name of the Applicant : Shri R.K.Jain
Name of the Public Authority : NIC/CESTAT
Non compliance of Order dated 29.9.09 and response to showcause notice
in respect of Case No. CIC/AD/A/2008/001149
1, The CIC decision in the above case is reproduced below:
'The Respondent from NIC submitted that NIC is not the custodian of
information about the projects undertaken for computerization of
CESTAT, and that the RTI request has been transferred to the CPIO,
CESTAT on 18.6.08 while providing information available with NIC,
which was furnished by the Senior Technical Director on 5.6.09. The
Appellant sated that no information has been received from CESTAT till
date although a reminder was sent by him to the concerned CPIO,
CESTAT on 14.8.09. The Commission accordingly directs the CPIO,
NIC to allow inspection of all the files by the Appellant in respect of
Points (c), (d), (e) & (f) and provide certified copies of the documents
the Appellant desires. With regard to points (a) and (b), the CPIO,
CESTAT to provide complete information by 20.10.09 and also to
appear for a hearing on 30.10.09 along with explanation to the show
cause notice as to why a penalty should not be imposed on him for not
providing the information. The inspection of files in NIC to be
completed by 20 October, 2009′.
2. The Bench of Mrs. Annapurna Dixit, Information Commissioner, scheduled the
hearing for October 30, 2009.
3. Shri Mohinder Singh, CPIO, CESTAT represented the Public Authority.
4. The Applicant was present during the hearing.
Decision
5 The Respondent CPIO provided the following explanation to the showcause
notice :
i) In addition to the CPIO charge, he is also holding/supervising the
charge of Admn. & Estt. of Principal Bench and also attending to the
overall work of Admn. & Estt. of other five Regional benches i.e.
Mumbai, Chennai, Kolkata, Ahmedabad and Bangalore. As in-charge
of Admn. & Estt. More time and concentration is required for executing
the work timely.
ii) The Complainant has filed numerous RTI applications before him for
giving various Judicial/Administrative information relating to Principal
Bench, CESTAT, Delhi and other Regional Benches. He added that the
Complainant has filed 96 out of 141 RTI applications in 2008 and 223
out of 267 in the year 2009.
iii) To attend to the huge number of RTI applications, he has neither been
given any training nor sufficient staff. The existing staff is already
burdened with administrative work assigned to them. Therefore, it
becomes very difficult to handle the charge of CPIO and also to attend
various RTI applications all alone. He also added that due to the huge
number of RTI applications, the administrative work as well as judicial
work of other branches are pending and have been badly affected.
6. The Commission on review of the explanation provided accepts the reasons
given for the delay in providing information, condones the delay in this case
and drops the penalty proceedings against the CPIO.
7. The Appellant submitted that he had inspected the files at NIC and noted that
some files were missing and had submitted a note on the missing information
to NIC, a copy of which was submitted to the Commission. He further added
that CESTAT has provided only 10% of the information and that for the
remaining 90% has requested him to inspect all relevant files and that he is
agreeable to this arrangement.
8. The Commission after hearing the submissions of both sides, directs the
CPIO, CESTAT to allow inspection of files as also the records availableon the
computer by the Appellant on a mutually convenient date and to provide him
with certified copies of documents sought, free of cost. The CPIO, CESTAT is
also directed to provide an affidavit in respect of information not available
with them, giving reasons for their non-availability. The Appellant to facilitate
this process by providing the CPIO with a list of files he wishes to inspect.
9. The Commission also directs CPIO, NIC to allow inspection of file scontaining
the relevant information as indicated by the Appellant in his note dt.28.10.09
submitted to the CPIO, NIC, on a mutually convenient date and to provide
him certified copies of documents sought, free of cost. The CPIO, NIC is also
directed to provide an affidavit in the case of information not available on
record, giving reasons for its non-availability.
10. The Commission also directs the CPIO, NIC and CPIO, CESTAT to submit a
report to the Commission with regard to compliance with Section 4(1)(b) of
the RTI Act by 25 November, 2009
11. All information to be provided by 25 November,2009.The entire exercise
should be completed by 15.11.09.
12. The Appellant is also directed to submit a compliance report to the
Commission by 25.11.09.
13. The case disposed of with the above directions.
(Annapurna Dixit)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy:
(G.Subramanian)
Asst. Registrar
Cc:
1. Shri R.K.Jain
House No.1512-B
Bhishm Pitamah Marg
Wazir Nagar
New Delhi
2. The CPIO
National Informatics Centre – HQ
A- Block, CGO Complex
Lodhi Road
New Delhi 110 003
3. The CPIO
Customs Excise & Service Tax
Appellate Tribunal
West Block No.2
R.K.Puram
New Delhi 110 066
4. The Appellate Authority
National Informatics Centre – HQ
A- Block, CGO Complex
Lodhi Road
New Delhi 110 003
5. The Appellate Authority
Customs Excise & Service Tax
Appellate Tribunal
West Block No.2
R.K.Puram
New Delhi 110 066
6. Officer incharge, NIC
7. Press E Group, CIC