The court emphasized that penalty under the RTI Act can only be imposed if the concerned functionary has not provided information without reasonable cause or for malafide reasons.

JUDGMENT

Jayant Nath, J. - W.P.(C) 5638/2016

1. This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking to impugn the orders dated 03.05.2016 and 11.03.2016 passed by the CIC.

2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is a practicing lawyer in Delhi for the last 28 years. She has also been performing the duties as a Notary Public for the last 18 years. The petitioner has been furnishing annual returns to respondent No. 2 under the Notaries Act, 1952. It is further stated that the role of a Notary Public is of a confidential nature and the information in respect of notarization cannot be revealed to a third party. Reliance is placed on Section 8(1) (d), 8 (1) (e) and Section 11of the RTI Act, 2005 and Section 126 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

3. It is stated that Sh. Nand Lal respondent No.1 alleged that his immovable property was transferred by an advocate and the concerned document was attested and authenticated by the petitioner. It is further alleged by the respondent Sh.Nand Lal that the petitioner in 2015 refused to provide any information pertaining to the transaction claiming it to be a third party information.

4. It is pleaded that on 08.05.2015, the petitioner received a communication from respondent No. 2, Ministry of Law and Justice forwarding an RTI Application. The said letter reads as follows:-

"An application under RTI Act, 2005 has been submitted in the Department seeking therein.

a) The serial number of first and last act performed by you for each of the years 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013.

b) Copies of your Notary Register for the years 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013.

The aforesaid information please be furnished to this Department at the earliest for providing the same to Shri Nand Lal in accordance with the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005.

Further, with reference to your letter dated 26.03.2015 forwarding therein the annual returns for the year 2008 to 2012, it is informed that Shri Nand Lal has claimed copy of the letter is enclosed, that the annual return for the year 2008 has not been provided by you. The Annual Report for the year 2008- 2009, as submitted by you, is actually pertains to the year 2009 only and the Return for the year 2008 has not been provided at all. In this regard you are also requested to kindly furnish the annual report for the year 2008 for necessary compliance with the order dated 20.2.2015 passed by the Information Commissioner in appeal no. CIC/SA/A/2014/00070 FILED BY Shri Nand Lal."

5. The petitioner in a reply dated 21.05.2015 however stated that the functions of a notary are confidential in nature. Reliance was placed on the statutory provisions of the RTI Act and the Evidence Act. It was urged that a third party has no locus to enquire about confidential information of hundreds of entries noted by a notary public in his register which are third party transactions.

6. It is further stated that as Sh. Nand Lal the respondent No.1 was enquiring about the old records, the petitioner started looking into the old records which were kept along with the disposed off matters. On searching, the petitioner found some of the records and documents were eaten by termites. Only the record for the year 2013 (half eaten by termites) could be cleaned and recovered. The petitioner lodged an FIR regarding the damage done to the records in PS Tilak Marg on 25.05.2015. Information to this effect was also sent to the respondent vide letter dated 04.08.2015.

7. On 07.04.2016, respondent No. 2 again sought the following information:-

"i. To furnish

a) List of Notary Register damaged by termite,

b) list of those survived termite attack.

c) partially damaged register,

d) Report of inquiry and action taken report on loss of registers due to termite along with the names of notaries and officers responsible for this serious negligence, whether the notary, the custodian of their registers, if reported to the CPIO about termite attack, alongwith the relevant papers, what action w