3692/Cic-Bm/2018
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
TELANGANA STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION (Under Right to Information Act, 2005) Samachara Hakku Bhavan, D.No.5-4-399, ‘4’ Storied Commercial Complex, Housing Board Building, Mojam Jahi Market, Hyderabad – 500 001. Phone Nos: 040-24743399 (O); 040-24740592(F) Appeal No. 3655, 3656, 3676, 3677, 3678, 3679, 3680, 3681, 3682, 3683, 3684, 3685, 3687, 3688, 3689, 3690, 3691, 3692, 3769, 3777, 3779, 3789, 3893, 5619, 5620, 6066, 6071 & 7145/CIC/2018/CIC/2018, Order dated:21-10-2020 Appellant : Sri Y. Krishna Reddy H.No.6-6-350, Vivekananda Nagar Colony, Ward No.5, Nalgonda town Nalgonda district - 508 001. Respondents : The Public Information Officer (U/RTI Act, 2005) /O/o the Zilla Praja Parishad, Nalgonda District. : The First Appellate Authority (U/RTI Act, 2005) / O/o the Zilla Praja Parishad, Nalgonda District COMMON ORDER Sri Y.Krishna Reddy has filed these 2nd appeals on different dates i.e., on 12-02-2018, 19-03-2018, 27-03-2018, 10-04-2018, 20-04-2018 and 02-12-2018 which were received by this Commission on 02-03-2018, 04-04-2018, 10-04-2018, 01- 05-2018 & 05-05-2018 for not getting the information sought by him from the Public Information Officer/O/o the Zilla Praja Parishad Officer, Nalgonda District and the First Appellate Authority/ O/o the Mandal Parishad Development Officers of Gurrampode, Devarakonda, Kattangur, Nalgonda, Chandur, Kethepally, Chandampeta, Tripuraram, Adavidevulapally, Shaligowraram, Nakrekal, Anumula,Peddavura, Miryalaguda, Nampally, Pedda Adiserla Pally, Gundlapally, Marriguda, Chintapally, Kanagal, Damaracherla, Damaracherla, Thiparthi, Kanagal, Vemulapally Mandal, Nalgonda District, First Appellate Authority O/o Executive Engineer, PR, Nalgonda, Nalgonda District and First Appellate Authority O/o the Executive Engineer, RWS, Nalgonda, Nalgonda District. The briefTSIC facts of these cases as per the appeals and other records received along with it are that the appellant herein filed an application dated 08-09-2017 before the Public Information Officer requesting to furnish the information under Sec. 6(1) of the RTI Act, 2005 on the following points mentioned: PTO Note: This is system generated copy and no signature is required 2 Stating that he did not get any response from the Public Information Officer, the appellant filed 1st appeals dated 28-12-2017 before different First Appellate Authorities U/s. 19 (1) of the RTI Act, 2005 requesting them to furnish the information sought by him. As the appellant did not get any response from the Public Information Officer/ First Appellate Authorities, he preferred these 2nd appeals before this Commission U/s. 19(3) of the RTI Act, 2005 requesting to arrange to furnish the information sought by him. Basing on the material papers available on record, the appeals are taken on file. In view of the spread of Covid-19 Pandemic, all these cases are heard together over phone on 21.10.2020 with prior intimation to the concerned parties. Y.Krishna Reddy, the appellant and Ms. Kanthamma, Public Information Officer/ Dy. CEO, O/o Zilla Praja Parishad, Nalgonda District responded to the phone call. All these cases arise out of one 6(1) application dated 08.09.2017 filed before the Public Information Officer, Zilla Praja Parishad, Nalgonda. Therefore all these cases are heard together and a common order is passed. The appellant submitted that he did not receive any information from the Public Information Officer on point No.12 though more than three years have elapsed. The Public Information Officer submitted that as the information on point No. 12 is scattered among different Mandals, the 6(1) application was transferred to the Public Information Officers of the O/o MPDO, Executive Engineers (RWS) of Nalgonda, Suryapet and Yadadri Bhongir Districts and Executive Engineers (PR) of Nalgonda, Suryapet, Yadadri Bhongir and Miryalaguda districts U/s. 6 (3) of the RTI Act for furnishing information directly to the appellant under intimation to their office. It is seen from the material available on record that the appellant filed one 6(1) application before the PIO, O/o. Zilla Praja Parishad, Nalgonda. The Public Information Officer vide letter No.D5/3618/2017/ZPP dt.26-09-2017 furnished information for point Nos.2 to 8 and 10 and for point Nos.1,9, 11 & 12 asked the Appellant to pay an amount of Rs.2,204/- for furnishing the information. After receiving the said amount, the Public Information Officer has furnished the information on Point Nos.1, 9 & 11, which was acknowledged by the Appellant on 12-12-2017. On Point No.12, the Public Information Officer transferred the 6(1) application to different Public Information Officers, U/s. 6 (3) of the Act pursuant to which, the appellant instead of requesting these different Public Information Officers to furnish information to him, filed 1st appeals in all these cases before different Mandal Parishads and he later filed 2nd appeals before this Commission.TSIC It can be clearly seen that for one RTI application, the appellant filed 28 second appeals before this Commission, when there is no such provision in the RTI Act. A perusal of the record would disclose that the PIO has transferred the 6 (1) application to different Public Information Officers against the guidelines given by the Government of India in Office Memorandum No.10/2/2008-IR, dated 12.06.2008, which reads thus: PTO Note: This is system generated copy and no signature is required 3 “3. Given hereinunder are some situations which may arise in the matter and action required to be taken by the Public Authorities in such cases: (i) …. (ii) A person makes an application to a Public Authority for information only a part of which is available with that public authority and a part of the information concerns some another “public authority’. In such a case the Public Information Officer should supply information available with and a copy of the application should be sent to that another public authority under intimation to the Appellant. (iii) A person makes an application to a public authority for information a part of which is available with that public authority and rest of the information is scattered with more than one other public authorities. In such a case, the Public Information Officer of the public authority receiving the application should give information relating to it and advise the applicant to make separate applications to the concerned public authorities for obtaining information from them, if no part of the information sought, is available with it but is scattered with more than one other public authorities the Public Information Officer should inform the applicant that information is not available with the public authority and that the applicant should make separate applications to the concerned Public Authorities for obtaining information from them. Having regard to the facts and circumstances obtaining in these cases, by following the Office Memorandum of the Government of India dated 12.06.2018, referred to above, the Public Information Officer ought to have transferred the RTI application to only one Public Authority by furnishing available and held information with him and would have advised the appellant to file separate applications to the concerned Public Authorities for the remaining information. Thereby the PIO is directed to furnish the information available in their office on point No.12 to the appellant within one week from the date of receipt of this order by Registered Post with Acknowledgement due under intimation to the Commission and the Appellant is at liberty to file separate applications afresh U/s. 6 (1) with other public authorities by seeking specific information required. With the above direction, all these appeals are disposed of. TSICBUDDHA MURALI CHIEF INFORMATION COMMISSIONER (FAC) Authenticated by: (P.S. to CIC (FAC)) Copy to: SO / SF / OC Note: This is system generated copy and no signature is required.