CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2010/001804/8886
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/001804
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Ms. Geeta Devi
B-201, Phase II, Metro Vihar,
Holambi Kalan, Delhi – 110082.
Respondent : Mr. Ajay Arora
Public Information Officer & Assistant Commissioner
Govt. of NCT of Delhi
Food, Supply and Consumer Affairs Department
O/o Assistant Commissioner (North West)
CC Block, Shalimar Bagh
Delhi – 110088.
RTI application filed on : 21/12/2009 PIO replied : 05/02/2010 First appeal filed on : Not mentioned. First Appellate Authority order : 08/04/2010 Second Appeal received on : 28/06/2010 Sl. Information Sought Reply of the PIO
1. The reasons for the delay in issuing BPL The Appellant’s income is much more than the
ration card even though more than a year has prescribed limit in order to be eligible for BPL ration
passed since the filing the application for a card.
new card.
2. Expected time frame within which the card As per the receipt, ration was allotted for the months
will be issued. August/September 2009.
Grounds for the First Appeal:
No information provided by the PIO.
Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
The FAA ordered the PIO to provide a certified copy of the rejection report of the Area Inspector to the
Appellant within 20 days.
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
No information provided by the PIO despite FAA’s order.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant: Ms. Geeta Devi;
Respondent: Mr. Dharam Vir, FSO(C-I) on behalf of Mr. Ajay Arora, PIO & Assistant Commissioner;
The appellant has been provided the information and also sent the copy of the rejection report of
the Area Inspector after order of the FAA. The appellant states that there is an overwriting in the column
of the Annual Income of the appellant. The Commission has noticed this but the PIO states that this is a
Page 1 of 2
copy of the original rejection report on the file. The appellant may be able to get some relief if she files
and appeal to the Commissioner of the Food Supplies.
The appellant had filed the application on 21/12/2009 and she should have received the information
before 21/01/2010. Instead the information ahs been provided to the appellant on 05/02/2010. The
respondent states that the person responsible for providing the information late was Mr. Suresh the then
FSO Circle-I and APIO.
Decision:
The Appeal is disposed.
The information has been provided.
The issue before the Commission is of not supplying the complete, required information by Mr.
Suresh the then FSO Circle-I and deemed PIO within 30 days as required by the law.
From the facts before the Commission it is apparent that the deemed PIO is guilty of not furnishing
information within the time specified under sub-section (1) of Section 7 by not replying within 30 days, as
per the requirement of the RTI Act. It appears that the PIO’s actions attract the penal provisions of Section
20 (1). A showcause notice is being issued to him, and he is directed give his reasons to the Commission
to show cause why penalty should not be levied on him.
Mr. Suresh the then FSO Circle-I will present himself before the Commission at the above address on
17 September 2010 at 11.00am alongwith his written submissions showing cause why penalty should not
be imposed on him as mandated under Section 20 (1). He will also submit proof of having given the
information to the appellant.
If there are other persons responsible for the delay in providing the information to the Appellant the
PIO is directed to inform such persons of the show cause hearing and direct them to appear before the
Commission with him.
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.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
10 August 2010
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(RR)
CC:
To,
Mr. Suresh the then FSO Circle-I through Mr. Ajay Arora, PIO & AC;
Page 2 of 2
