CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Appeal No.CIC/WB/A/2008/01551 dated 16.10.2008
Right to Information Act 2005 - Section 19
Appellant - Shri S. P. Goyal;
Respondent - Central Information Commission
Facts
:
By an application dated18.2.08 received by this Commission on 25.2.08,
Shri S. P. Goyal of New Marine Lines, Mumbai applied to CPIO, Central
Information Commission seeking information on 12 points with 10 sub-points to
Question No. 7 and 4 sub points to Question No. 9, on receipt of a letter dated
15.12.06 and action taken thereon. To this he received a point wise replied dated
20.3.08 from then CPIO Shri Haleem Khan, Secretary, as follows:
Item Reply
1. A photocopy of your letter dated 15.12.2006 is available in
Commission’s record in file No. CIC/MA/A/2006/00831. No diary
no. has been mentioned on the letter.
2. The records of the Commission do no indicate any such
correspondence having been made.
3. A copy of the Right to Information (Regulation of Fee and Cost)
Rules, 2005 is enclosed. (Total pages 2) you may go through the
Rules and if so desire you may seek legal advice.
4. Same as reply to Item No. ‘3’ above.
5. The Central Information Commision provides a receipt as and
when any letter/ complaint/ appeal is delivered in person or by
post which is accompanied with acknowledgment slip.
6. Your letter dated 15.12.2006 has been placed in the relevant file.
The concerned case was disposed of on 27th November, 2006
7. (i) Letter dated 7.6.2007; Its diary no. is 30801 dated 23.6.2007.
(ii) No such internal correspondence has taken place. However, you
may inspect the file if you so desire.
(iii) A photocopy of your letter dated 7.6.2007 is enclosed (Total
pages2).
(iv) The matter was decided vide Commission’s order dated 15.6.2007
in case no. CIC/AT/C/2007/00282. Copy of the decision enclosed
(Total pages 3).
(v) The information asked for is of the nature of opinion. We have no
information in this regard.
1
(vi) The provisions of the Act & Rules and the decision of Mr. A. N.
Tiwari, the Information Commissioner is available with you. If
need be the same may be downloaded from CIC website.
(vii) No such report of Commissioner of Income Tax-XII is available in
the record of the Commission, except the order dated 1.6.2007 of
CPIO which you had filed with your complaint petition.
(viii) Other than the decision of IC, we have no other information in this
regard.
(ix) You may seek legal advice if you so desire.
(x) You may seek legal advice if you so desire.
8. No comments.
9. You may seek legal advice if you so desire.
(i) Letter dated 21.9.2007: The diary no. is 43861 dated 4.10.2007.
(ii) The hearing was already fixed in the matter on 10.10.2007.
(iii) The matter has been put up for decision.
(iv) No specific time fame is laid down.
10. You may seek legal advice if you so desire.
11. You may seek legal advice if you so desire.
12. A copy of show cause notice issued to the CPIO u/s 20 (1) and the
reply received from the CPIO are enclosed (total pages 3).
Not satisfied, however, appellant moved his first appeal on 14.4.08 before
First Appellate Authority Shri L. C. Singhi in which, through a separate sheet, he
has categorized his request and response received as follows:
Information Information given under Reason & Ground of
sought vide my Right to Information appeal under Section
letter dated Act, 2005 Central 19(1) of Right to
18.2.2008 Public Information Information Act, 2005.Officer dated 20.3.2008
Initially the appeal was scheduled for 16.5.08 at 11.00 a.m. However, since
the party appeared before Shri M Haleem Khan, who by then was First Appellate
Authority and who had earlier been CPIO who had dealt with the case, he
decided as follows:“Shri S. P. Goyal was informed about the technical difficulties in
hearing the appeal by the Secretary as the First Appellate2
Authority. The Chief Information Commissioner will hear this
appeal.With regard to Shri S. P. Goyal’s query at Para 7 (vii) of his
application dated 18.2.2008, the documents received from the
Office of the Commissioner of Income Tax 12 (7 pages in total),
which were handled over to him personally.”The first appellate authority being Shri LC Singhi, an officer junior to
Secretary Shri Haleem Khan, and therefore not authorised u/s 19 sub-section (1)
to hear the 1st appeal, the appeal was then heard by us on 12.11.2008 through
videoconference. The following are present:Appellant at NIC Studio Mumbai
Shri S. P. Goyal
Respondents at CIC Studio, New Delhi
Shri D. C. Singh, Under Secretary
Shri M. C. Sharma, Under SecretarySince we found that the ground for appeal u/s 19(1) described by appellant
Shri Goyal in his first appeal were largely an expression of dissatisfaction at
systems existing in this Commission rather than request for any further
information not received, and request for opinions on decisions of this
Commission in its order No. CIC/AT/C/2007/00282 dated 15.10.07, which was
outside the competence of this Commission to review, we went through the
questions point by point in the hearing. In this matter we find that the information
sought at Point No. 7 (iv) was as follows, followed by response received and the
grounds for appeal submitted by appellant:Please inform The matter was decided vide Order supplied
whether this Commission’s order dated under this S. No. is
letter is replied 15.6.2007 in case no. of 15.10.2007 & not
if so give copy CIC/AT/C/2007/00282. Copy 15.6.2007
of your reply. of the decision enclosed
(Total Pages 3).
On this respondent and present CPIO Shri D. C. Singh explained that in
fact the date 15.10.07 is a typographical error.
3
With regard to the Q. No. 12, the following was the question:
“With reference to order F. No. CIC/AT/A/2007/00344 dated
13.6.2007 the portion of order as under:-
It is directed that a separate notice may issue to the CPIO to show
cause as to why penalty under Section 20 (1) not be imposed on
him for providing the appellant incorrect and misleading
information. The notice is returnable in two weeks time.
Please provided the copy of notice issued to the Central Public
Information Officer to Show Cause why penalty under section 20(1)
not be imposed as well as reply received by Central Information
Commision from Central Public Information Officer against above
order.”
The CPIO’s response was as follows:
“A copy of show cause notice issued to the CPIO u/s 20(1) and the
reply received from the CPIO are enclosed (Total pages 3).”
Appellant Shri Goyal submitted that he had not in fact received the three
pages, stated to have been attached with the response from CPIO.
DECISION NOTICE
Having heard the arguments and examined the record, we find that the only
outstanding issue is copies of three documents stated to have been sent as an
attachment to his letter by the then CPIO Shri Mohammad Haleem Khan but not
received by appellant Shri S. P. Goyal. Present CPIO Shri D.C. Singh Under
Secretary and Assistant Registrar is directed to supply this information on FAX /
Speed Post on the date of hearing. It has subsequently been confirmed that this
has been sent by Speed Post.
Insofar as seeking the opinion of the CPIO on a decision is concerned, it is
clear that information sought must be information held in material form. The
opinion of the Commission stands expressed in the very decision that appellant
4
has found unsatisfactory. The stand of the CPIO is therefore entirely in accord
with the law.
In matters in which appellant Shri S.P. Goyal has expressed his
dissatisfaction with the decision of this Commission in File No.
CIC/AT/C/2007/00282 dated 15.10.07, appellant was informed that u/s 19 sub-
section (7) the decision of this Commission is binding, this allowing for no appeal.
Recourse in this matter can, therefore, be a Writ Petition under Article 260 of the
Constitution of India.
The appeal is thus allowed in part.
Announced in the hearing. Notice of this decision be given free of cost to
the parties.
(Wajahat Habibullah)
Chief Information Commissioner
12.11.2008
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 Shreyaskar)
Joint Registrar
12.11.2008
5