RTI Corner

Part information was provided in response to the applicant seeking information regarding seniority list of staff nurse. On appeal, the First Appellate Authority directed the PIO to provide information to the appellant, if available. A Show Cause Notice was issued by the CIC for complete non application of mind, non-furnishing of information in response to the RTI application, non-compliance of the FAA’s order and violation of the mandate laid down by the RTI Act. The PIO submitted before the CIC that as PIO, Health Department as Nodal Officer, his responsibility always involved forwarding the questions/information sought by the applicant to the concerned branches under Health Department and forwarding the response received from them to the applicant i.e. the role of a Nodal PIO is that of a post office. The CIC observed that such a poor understanding of the RTI Act can be rectified not by imposing penalty, but by referring the Nodal PIO for a training session to upgrade his knowledge about RTI Act. The CIC marked a copy of the order to the FAA, H&FW Department to take necessary steps ensuring that the Nodal PIO is appropriately trained to handle RTI cases and made aware that the role of Nodal PIO encompasses more duties than acting merely as a post office
Comments
A PIO is not just a post office and should act as a catalyst in expediting dissemination of information by the actual custodian of information.
Citation: Smt. Nirmala Kumari v. 1. PIO, Deptt. Of Health & Family Welfare and PIO, O/o Medical Supdt., Lok Nayak Hospital in Second Appeal No. CIC/LOKHN/A/2017/151062, Date of Decision: 30.10.2019

The PIO, ISRO, Department of Space, was requested to provide information on five points pertaining to M/s KHFM Hospitality Management Services, (a Contractor), including information about the labour license and the category of workers. A copy of the wages paid by the Contractor, duly endorsed by the ISRO (Principal employer) was provided to the appellant. The PIO further stated that the record sought by the appellant may be available with the Contractor but documents cannot be obtained from a private person and provided to the appellant under the RTI Act. The CIC observed that the PIO was not aware that information can be obtained from a private person under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act. In the absence of any malafide intention, it would not be appropriate to initiate any action for imposition of penalty on the PIO.
Comments
As per section 2(f) of the RTI Act, if a law or statute permits and allows the public authority to access the information relating to a private body, it will fall within the four corners of Section 2(f) of the RTI Act.
Citation: K Sambasivaiah v. CPIO, ISRO, Department of Space in Second Appeal No. CIC/DSPCE/A/2018/125894, Date 01.11.2019
Dr. Anuradha Verma (dranuradhaverma@yahoo.co.in) is an expert on RTI matters and has co-authored the books RIGHT TO INFORMATION - LAW AND PRACTICE and PIO’s guide to RTI. Her other articles can be read at the website of RTI Foundation of India at the link: - Right to Information Act 2005- RTI Foundation of India

The Appellant sought the copies of all the official circulars, orders etc for ensuring “Adequate Safe Drinking Water to Public of Rajasthan in least minimum time” sent from time to time by the Department of Drinking Water and Sanitation to State of Rajasthan from 2002 till 29 March 2017. The PIO submitted that the desired information from the year 2011 onwards is available on the website of the concerned Ministry. However, before that the subject matter was handled by the Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation and hence, all the physical records available with them which were transferred from MDWS, are not in a consolidated and a ready-made form. The CIC directed to provide an additional reply to the appellant giving him proper hyper-links and sub-links where the desired information from the year 2011 can be located. Further, the inspection of the records related to the period before 2011 was ordered.
Comments
Information of such nature should be suo-moto disclosed by the Public Authority on their website for the ease and convenience of the public at large as a part of their obligation under section 4 (2) of the RTI Act. The PIO should provide the proper hyper-links and sub-links where the information sought by an applicant is available instead of plainly referring to on the website.
Citation: Sunil Pareek v. Ministry of Jal Shakti Department of Drinking Water and Sanitation in Decision no.: CIC/MODWS/A/2017/606108/MODWS/02019, Date of Decision: 31/10/2019
Dr. Anuradha Verma (dranuradhaverma@yahoo.co.in) is an expert on RTI matters and has co-authored the books RIGHT TO INFORMATION - LAW AND PRACTICE and PIO’s guide to RTI. Her other articles can be read at the website of RTI Foundation of India at the link: - Right to Information Act 2005- RTI Foundation of India