ORDER

1. The complainant filed an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Directorate General of Performance Management, IP Estate, New Delhi, seeking information on eight points, including, inter-alia:-

(i) Please provide the date and diary under which the proposal for issue of NOC for grant of extension of deputation to Shri J.K. Rana, Assistant in the CCE Settlement Commission, New Delhi has been received in Directorate;

(ii) Please provide the File No. in which the aforesaid communication of the Settlement Commission has been dealt with. Please also intimate the number of notesheets pages and correspondence pages contained in the file, etc.

2. Being aggrieved with the response given by the respondent, the complainant filed a complaint u/Section 18 of the RTI Act before the Commission requesting to take appropriate legal action against the CPIO u/Section 20 of the RTI Act. Hearing:

3. The complainant and the respondent could not attend the hearing.

Decision:

4. The Commission, after perusal of records, observed that it is very clear on the face of the RTI application that the complainant had sought certain information as enumerated above. But, the CPIO in its letter dated 08.04.2019 had denied the disclosure of information in toto under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. The Commission observed that certain information as sought by the complainant on point nos. (a), (b) and (g) of the RTI application viz. Please provide the date and diary under which the proposal for issue of NOC for grant of extension of deputation to Shri J.K. Rana, Assistant in the CCE Settlement Commission, New Delhi has been received in Directorate, etc. is official information which can always be disclosed under the RTI Act. But it seems that the CPIO without application of mind had denied the information in toto under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. This shows that the CPIO is not aware about the provisions of the RTI Act and has obstructed the information to the complainant.

5. In the above circumstances, levy of penalty is warranted. Therefore, this Commission is constrained to impose a penalty of Rs. 500/- u/Section 20(1) of the RTI Act, 2005 on the then CPIO who held charge of the RTI application during the relevant period for his casual and callous approach in responding to the RTI application. The amount of Rs. 500/- shall be deducted by the Public Authority from his salary by way of a demand draft drawn in favour of “PAO, CAT”, New Delhi and the demand draft should be forwarded to the Deputy Registrar (CR-II), email: dyregcr2_cic@gov.in Room No. 106, First Floor, Central Information Commission, Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka, New Delhi- 110067. This demand draft of Rs. 500/- should reach the Commission by 16.04.2021. The Head of the Department should figure that who was the CPIO who held the charge of the RTI application during the relevant period and should ensure that penalty should be deducted from his salary. The respondent is directed to ensure service a copy of this order to the Head of the department.

6. No further intervention of the Commission is required in the matter.

7. With the above observations, the complaint is disposed of.

8. Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.