Section 5(4) of the RTI Act- Denial of Information:
[Shri Prithvi M. vs. ICAI, File No. CIC/SS/A/2013/001875/ KY, dated on 27.08.2014]
Decision:
“It would be seen here that the appellant, vide his RTI Application dated 08.02.2013, sought information from the respondents on three issues as contained therein. Respondents vide their response dated 08.03.2013, allegedly provided the required information to the appellant on all issues. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid response, FA was filed by the appellant on 26.03.2013 before the FAA, who vide order dated 25.04.2013, upheld the decision of CPIO. Hence, a Second Appeal before this Commission.
It is pertinent to mention here that the CPIO, vide his response dated 08.03.2013, provided the required information to the appellant against issue no. 1 only. Further, learned FAA, vide his order dated 25.04.2013, disposed of the FA by upholding the views of CPIO. However, it is to be seen here that required information against issues no. 2 & 3 were not provided on the ground of non-availability of the record in respondent’s office.
On being queried by the Commission, as to why the required information was not provided to the appellant against issues no. 2 & 3. On this very aspect, it is submitted by Smt. Seema Gerotra, Deputy Director & PIO, that the records are not available in PIO’s office. However, the relevant information pertaining to issues no. 2 & 3, is available in the office of CBDT.
In view of this, it is clear that the information sought by the appellant, against issue no. 2 & 3, is in existence in the Public Authority of her sister’s Branch i.e. CBDT. For this, PIO of ICAI could have easily invoked section 5(4) of the RTI Act 2005 for obtaining the required information. However, it could not be done by the PIO concerned for reasons best known to her.
The Commission heard the submissions made by respondents at length. The Commission also perused the case-file thoroughly; especially, nature of issues raised by the appellant in his RTI application dated 08.02.2013, respondent’s response dated 08.03.2013, FAA’s order dated 25.04.2013 and also the grounds of memorandum of second appeal.
By virtue of position above and in the circumstances of the case, the Commission is of the considered view that the respondents have failed to provide the required information to the appellant, even after lapse of eighteen months period. Thus, the respondents have, deliberately, defeated the very purpose of the RTI Act 2005 for which it was legislated by Parliament of India. As such, the Commission feels that appellant’s second appeal deserves to be allowed against issues no. 2 & 3 of the RTI application dated 08.02.2013. Therefore, it is allowed accordingly.
In view of the above, the respondents are hereby directed to provide the complete and categorical information, against issue no. 2 & 3 only, to the appellant, within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order under intimation to this Commission. If need be, Section 5(4) of the RTI Act 2005 be also invoked in the matter”.
