2013 (9) TMI 786 - Commission - Indian Laws

Right to information - Delay in furnishing information - Held that - there is prima facie delay in providing information to the appellant, a separate show cause notice shall be issued to the CPIO and deemed CPIO to explain as to why a penalty of two hundred and fifty rupees not exceeding twenty five thousand rupees shall not be imposed for causing such delay in providing information to the appellant - Decided in favour of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
1. Delay in providing information to the appellant.
2. Allegations of misstatements by the CPIO.
3. Non-compliance with the order to maintain specific registers.
4. Lack of response and partial information provided by the deemed CPIO.

Analysis:

1. The appellant filed an RTI application seeking information from the CPIO but did not receive a response, leading to an appeal. The first appellate authority directed the Registrar of CESTAT to ensure maintenance of specified registers. The appellant then filed a second appeal citing mala fide actions, undue delays, and incomplete information received.

2. The appellant alleged that the CPIO made misstatements before the first appellate authority regarding correspondence with the vigilance officer, causing delays. The appellant contended that the reasons provided for the delay were invalid and that penalty and disciplinary proceedings should be initiated against specific officers.

3. The appellant argued that the order to maintain Memo Register, Complaint Register, and vigilance action register was not followed. The appellant highlighted delays in communication and partial responses from the deemed CPIO, emphasizing non-compliance with the directives.

4. During the hearing, the CPIO clarified typographical errors in mentioning the "vigilance officer" instead of the "deemed CPIO." The CPIO provided evidence of correspondence and a note sheet requesting the appointment of another CPIO. The Commission noted the delay in providing information and decided to issue a separate show cause notice to the CPIO and deemed CPIO for potential penalties ranging from two hundred and fifty rupees to twenty-five thousand rupees for the delay.

This detailed analysis of the judgment addresses the issues of delay, misstatements, non-compliance, and lack of response in the context of the RTI application and subsequent appeals, providing a comprehensive overview of the legal proceedings and decisions taken by the Central Information Commission.