CIC Conduct of the PIO shows that RTI application has been replied casually; His representative was not acquainted with the facts of the case and appeared before the CIC; PIO to take all steps u/s 5(4) to procure the available information as sought for
24 Jan, 2025Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 22.01.2023 seeking the following information:
“1. Kindly provide the certified Copy of the approval of the Works, along with the 'total approved cost of such Works', duly approved by way of Resolution of the General Body Meeting of the Society (Whether in General Meeting or in any Emergency General Body Meeting or any other General Body Meeting), against which the MC has initiated the Tendering Process.
2. Kindly provide the list of the name/s of the Committee Members who were authorized to draft and finalize the Tender Documents, along with their Technical Qualifications.
3. Kindly provide certified true copy of the list of the Organization/s, to whom these Tender Documents were issued
4. Kindly provide the certified copy of the list of the Organization/s who had quoted for these Tenders
5. Kindly provide the copies of the Tender Documents, as tendered by each Bidder/s, to carry out the said Works and as received by the MC, from the Tenderers.
”Resolution of the General Body Meeting of the Society (Whether in General Meeting or in any Emergency General Body Meeting or any other General Body Meeting), against which the MC has initiated the Tendering Process.
2. Kindly provide the list of the name/s of the Committee Members who were authorized to draft and finalize the Tender Documents, along with their Technical Qualifications.
3. Kindly provide certified true copy of the list of the Organization/s, to whom these Tender Documents were issued
4. Kindly provide the certified copy of the list of the Organization/s who had quoted for these Tenders
5. Kindly provide the copies of the Tender Documents, as tendered by each Bidder/s, to carry out the said Works and as received by the MC, from the Tenderers.”
The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 28.02.2023 stating as under:
“The member may seek information directly from the society U/s 139 of DCS Act, 2003.”
Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 28.03.2023. The FAA vide its order dated 26.04.2023, held as under.
“The PIO/AR (Sec-8) is directed to provide requisite information in terms of provisions of RTI Act, 2005 to the appellant within 07 days of receipt of this order. Also, if the applicant desires, he may be allowed to visit the office of the PIO to inspect the available records relating to his application to get the copies of the required information as per provisions of RTI Act, 2005. Further, the applicant desires, he may also file appeal u/s 139 of DCS Act, 2003 separately.”
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the non-compliance of FAA’s order, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Not present.
Respondent: Represented by Shri Satish Kumar, ASO present in person.
A written submission dated 27.08.2024 filed by the Appellant wherein he sought exemption from participating in the hearing proceedings and further pleaded as under:
“…C. That the said Society denied providing such information, vide the Society's Letter dated 01.09.2022 which was annexed with the said RTI & in the First Appeal and was also annexed in Second Appeal dated 19.06.2023 as Annexure IIIB.
D. That after the said information was denied by the said Society, Appellant filed RTI Application on 22.01.2023 to the PIO/Respondent, confirming that Appellant had sought similar RTI information, from the said Society, U/s 139, vide Appellant's above letter dated 03.08.2022. That the undersigned had also categorically confirmed (in the said RTI) that the said Society denied providing the desired information, vide their above said letter dated 01.09.2022. However, the PIO failed to take note of it and thought it fit to reply vide his letter dated 28.02.2022, that: "The member may seek information directly from the society U/s 139 of DCS Act,2003", without identifying name, designation and the contact details.
E. That the Appellant/ Complainant had sent in an Appeal to the Registrar of Societies dated 21.09.2022 which was annexed with the Second Appeal as Annexure IIIC, which remained unanswered. Failing to get positive response from the PIO/ CPIO, the Appellant/ Complainant filed the 1st Appeal on 28.03.2023, seeking again the similar information, as detailed out in above said Annexure IV, annexed in Second Appeal.
F. That the First Appellate Authority/ Dy. Registrar/ Respondent did not fix any hearing and disposed said Appeal dated 28.03.2023, vide his order dated 26.04.2023, directing the PIO/AR (Sec-8) to provide requisite information in terms of provisions of RTI Act 2005, within 7 days of receipt of the said order. Copy of the said order was annexed in the 2nd Appeal as Annexure V
G. Appellant is continuing to seek same information u/s 139 of RTI, as was sought, vide the letter dated 03.08.2022 Annexure IIIA, which was 29 / 31 WS.RTI Appeal RKJ 1943 A2 Date: 27.08.2024 denied by said Society vide their letter dated 01.09.2022 Annexure IIIB and such information/s are still not provided to the undersigned.
H. The CPIO / FAA have not provided any information till date as per the RTI application dated 22.01.2023, from the Appellant/ Complainant.
Prayers
i) The Appellant/ Complainant may kindly be provided the desired information, as detailed out in Annexure IIIA, as attached in the 2nd Appeal dated 19.06.2023.
ii) Penalize the concerned Officer/s and the concerned Office bearers of the said Society who have actively participated in preventing/ concealing the desire information from the Appellant/ Complainant.”
Further, a written submission dated 22.08.2024 filed by Shri Rajeev Chhabra, PIO/Asst. Registrar is taken on record, contents of the same are reproduced below for the sake of clarity:
“The information/documents sought therein remains with the coop. society only and not with RCS Office. Accordingly, the applicant was directed to obtain the information directly from Society u/s 139 of DCS Act which says,
(1) Any member of creditor having interest in the affairs of the co-operative society may seek information relating to any transaction of the cooperative society and for that purpose may be provided a certified copy of any document within thirty days from the date of receipt of application relating to such transaction on payment of such fee as may be specified
(2) Where a member or creditor having interest in affairs of a society seeking information prefers an appeal to the Registrar stating that the officer of the society without any reasonable cause, has refused to receive his application for providing information or has not furnished information within the time specified under sub-section (1) or has refused the request for information or knowingly given incorrect information or obstructed in any manner in furnishing the information, the registrar, after affording a reasonable opportunity of being herd to the officer of the society and the appellant, may either reject the appeal; or direct the officer of the society to furnish information within the period specified in the order or such extended period as may be allowed, and in case of default the Registrar may impose a penalty of two hundred and fifty rupees each day till the information is furnished, so however, the total amount of such penalty shall not exceed ten thousand rupees which shall be recoverable as arrears of land revenue in case of default in payment."
It is worth mentioning here that coop. societies are governed under DCS Act 2003 & DCS Rules 2007 which also have the provision of Right to Information u/s 139 as mentioned above and also appeal with RCS office.
Thereafter, the applicant filed first appeal in RCS Office. In the FAA Order dated 26.04.2023 it was reiterated that he may file appeal u/s 139 of DCS Act).
Accordingly, the matter may please be disposed with the directions to the applicant to avail the remedy u/s 139(2) of DCS Act in respect of information/documents lying with the society so that the matter may be heard/decided by the competent authority as per available provision of Act.”
Respondent vaguely stated that FAA directed the PIO to afford opportunity of inspected of relevant records to the Appellant, however, he was unaware of the fact as to whether any inspection was offered to the Appellant or not.
Decision:
The Commission at the outset is unhappy with the conduct of the PIO which shows that RTI application has been replied casually and further his representative was not acquainted with the facts of the case and appeared before the Commission without studying the relevant provisions but merely to mark his presence, which is not appreciated.
Now, considering the averments of the Appellant that he has already exhausted his alternative channel to procure the information under Section 139 of the RCS Act and did not get the requested information which led him to the filing of this RTI application and Second Appeal, the reply of the Respondent to this extent appears to be vague and legally flawed.
Since, considerable time has elapsed, the Commission directs the PIO to take all necessary steps to procure the available information as sought for in the RTI Application from the concerned record holder under Section 5(4) of the RTI Act or by invoking relevant provisions of the RCS Act, and provide the same directly to the Appellant within four weeks from the date of receipt of this order.
First Appellate Authority to ensure compliance of these directions.
Notwithstanding the above, the Commission expresses severe displeasure on the absence of the Respondent without intimating any reasons for the same and sternly cautions them not to repeat the same in future so as to avoid attracting penal action under the RTI Act.
The appeal is dismissed accordingly.
Vinod Kumar Tiwari
Information Commissioner
Citation: Raj Kumar Jain v. Office of the Registrar Cooperative Societies, New Delhi, CIC/GNCTD/A/2023/127134; Date of Decision : 05.09.2024