Right to Information Act, 2005

The Right to Information Bill was introduced in the Lok Sabha in December, 2004. It was passed

by both houses of Parliament with major amendments in May 2005. The President gave its assent on June

15 and the Act was notified in the Gazette on June 21. The law has become operational w.e.f. October 12,

2005.

This law seeks to replace the erstwhile Freedom of Information Act, 2002 but it was not found

effective having many loopholes. The suggestion given by National Advisory Council, Civil Society

Organizations, Peoples Movements and activist that right to information be made more progressive,

participatory and meaningful. After studying the suggestions and taking into considerations of the UPA

Govt.s, Common Minimum Programme, the Govt. of India decided to repeal the Freedom of Information

Act, 2002, by introducing Right to Information Act. Coverage : Chapter 1 : - The Act will applicable whole of India except Jammu & Kashmir.

Note 1 : J & K has its own freedom of Right of Information in 2004. Note 2 : The seven states have repealed their own laws with the enactment of RTI w.e.f. 12.10.2006

(Delhi, Rajasthan, Maharastra, Goa , Karnatka, Tamil Nadu & Assam) The Right of Information is well defined legislation and has VI Chapters, 31 sections. Jurisdiction : -

Will cover all levels of Govt. Centre, State, District, Local Self Governing Bodies like Panchayats, Municipal Bodies, Other Local Bodies, Cooperative Societies etc.;

Cover offices of Public Authorities established, owned or substantively financed by the Central, State Governments or Administrator of UTs.;

Any body controlled or substantively financed by these Governments; and Applicable to all non-governments organizations/ substantively financed, directly or indirectly by

these Governments (NGOs, VOs and other Bodies). India has included among 68 countries that have such legislature. Sweden has its existence in 1766 and it has the distinction of being the first country in the world to abolish political censorship and provided the public access to the Government documents. Now more than 65 countries have adopted RTI in various forms of the world depending upon their culture, government and civil society. Australia, Canada, New Zeeland, USA, Finland, Norway, France, UK, South Africa and Japan are the few countries. Information means (Section 2): -

Any material, in any form, including Records, documents, memos, emails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic form.

Other Bodies: Information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a Public Authority under any other law for the time being enforced. Right to Information means (Section 2): -

The information held or under the controlled of any Public Authority and includes:

Right to inspect works, documents, records Right to take notes, extracts or certified copies of documents or records Right to take samples of material Right to obtain information in the form of diskettes, floppies, tapes, video cassettes or in any other

electronic mode or through printouts where such information is stored in a computer or in any other

device. Note: 1) Right to Information whose disclosure is in the public interest (section 8).

2) Information which cannot be denied to Parliament or State Legislature shall not be denied to any person (section 8).

Records means (Section 2): -

(i) any document, manuscript and file;

(ii) any microfilm, microfiche and facsimile copy of a document;

(iii) any reproduction of image or images embodied in such microfilm (whether enlarged or not); and

(iv) any other material produced by a computer or any other device.

Public Authority means (Section 2): -

Any authority or body or Institutions or self-government established or constituted:-

(a) by or under the Constitution;

(b) by any other law made by Parliament;

(c) by any other law made by State Legislature;

(d) by notification issued or order made by the appropriate Government, and includes any

(i) body owned, controlled or substantially financed;

(ii) non-Government Organization substantially financed, directly or indirectly by funds provided by the appropriate Government

Main objectives of the RTI Act are: - To set up a practical regime for giving citizens access to information that is under the control of

public authorities and To promote transparency and accountability in the working of every public authority. RTI is a tool of Administrative Reform

Aim : -

Easy, timely and systematic availability of information empowered the citizens access to information held by or controlled by the Public Authority

Two tier system : - The Act will operate at two different levels of Governments at the Centre and

at the State each will have different set of PIO / APIO, appellant authority and Information

Commissioners. The three level regime for Accessing Information: -

At the first level of the regime, every public authority has designated officers for receiving applications (also called information requests) from citizens.

At the second level, every public authority has designated senior officers to look into those cases where citizens requests for information have been refused. If citizens do not get the requested information or are

unsatisfied with the information they have received, under this law they have the right to send an appeal to

the Department Appellate Authority (DAA) designated within the concerned public authority.

AT the third level, an independent State Information Commission (SIC) has been set up to look into those cases where citizens are unsatisfied with the decision of the DAA. The SIC also has the powers and

responsibility to monitor compliance of public authorities to this Act and submit an annual report to the State

Legislature.

Role of Courts (section 23) According to the RTI Act the decision of the State Information

Commission is binding on all parties. Courts are barred from inquiring into the decision of the SIC. But is

must be remembered that this law gives effect to a fundamental right of citizens. According to the

Constitution, the High Courts (Art. 224) and the Supreme Court (Art. 32) have the power to look into any

matter relating to the fundamental rights of citizens. Technically, a citizen has the right to approach the

High Court or the Supreme Court, if he/ she is not satisfied with the decision of the SIC.

Role of Public Information Officer / Assistant Public Information Officer (Section 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11)

Designation of State PIO - Section 5 (1) :

Every public authority shall, within one hundred days of the enactment of

this Act, designate as many officers as the Central Public Information Officers or State

Public Information Officers, as the case may be, in all administrative units or offices under

it as may be necessary to provide information to persons requesting for the information

under this Act.

PIO must be designated by every public authority at the level of

Administrative Unit or office under it.

In Public Authority controlled by the State Government, they are called State

Public Information Officer (SPIO).

Designation of Assistant Public Information Officer - Section 5 (2) :

Every public authority shall designate an officer, within one hundred days of

the enactment of this Act, at each sub-divisional level or other sub-district level as a

Central Assistant Public Information officer or a State Assistant Public Information Officer,

as the case may be, to receive the applications for information or appeals under this Act

for forwarding the same forthwith to the Central Public Information officer or the State

Public Information Officer or Senior Officer specified under sub-section (1) of section 19

or the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission, as the case

may be.

ASPIO is designated at the Sub Division or Sub District level.

The Department of Information Technology (Administrative Reforms), Govt. of Punjab has been made a

nodal AD for enforcing the provisions under the RTI Act.

The Department of Information Technology (Administrative Reforms) vide letter dated 15.09.2005 provided that the following criteria may be adopted for designating the SPIOS and ASPIOS

Sr. No.

Unit at which information is to be supplied

Concerned officer to be designated

A.P.I.O.

P.I.O.

Appellate Authority

1 2 3 4 5

1

Distt./ Tehsil Level

Immediate Junior Officer to the Distt. Head

Distt. Head

Head of the Department

2.

Region /Circle Level

Immediate junior officer to the Head of the region/circle.

Head of region/ circle

Head of the Department

3.

For the offices of DCs at Distt. level

Concerned Sub-Division Officer (c)

Deputy Commissioner of the Distt.

Commissioner of the Division.

4.

For the offices of Divisional Commissioner at Division Level

Immediate junior officer to the commissioner of division

Commissioner of the Division

Financial Commissioner, Revenue.

5.

For offices located at the level of the Head of the Deptt.

Immediate junior officer to the Head of the Department

Head of Department

Concerned Administrative Secretary of the department concerned.

6

At the level of Administrative Department

Concerned Under Secretary, Deputy Secretary, Joint Secretary, Additional or Special Secretary

Concerned Administrative Secretary of the Department

Chief Secretary to Government of Punjab.

The above is initiative one. The Administrative Department / Public Authority should make change or alternative arrangements in the aforesaid set up in view of the requirements of their departments.

Role of State PIO Section 7 :

Receive information requests (application) from citizen under this act and have the responsibilities and duties to provide the information within 30 days (48 hours concerning life

/liberty of person).

PIO shall render assistant to those who cannot write an application. Under this act, it is mandatory that he has the right to seek assistance from any other officer, if

he consider, necessary for the proper discharge of his duties, section 5 (4).

(such officer whose assistant is taken will also be treated as PIO and is liable to punished &

disciplinary action for not furnishing information in time or refusing information or for giving

wrong information or misleading information.

Give information in the form in which it is originally sought subject to resource constraints ad preservation of the record in question.

PIO to intimate the additional fee towards cost of providing information in writing within 15 days of the receipt of application and to intimate the details of the figures arrive at.

PIO has initial authority to decide whether disclosure of information is in public interest or not/which part of record covered by the exemption clause under Section 8 and Section 9.

PIO as the initial authority to give reason for rejection of information request, detail of time limit for appeal and the appropriate appeal authority.

It is the responsibility of PIO to prove that the rejection of a request was justified during appeal proceeding before State Information Commission (Section 19.5).

PIO to compile the information received from various quarters in the manner requested. He is Liaison between the Government and the State Information Commission

The Role of PIO is to provide information to the citizen under this act subject to provisions of this Act.

Section 7 sums up the role of PIO in a Public Authority: -

The PIO on receipt of request seeking information, shall dispose of request as

expeditiously as possible and in any within the thirty days of the receipt of the request (48 hours

concern the information relating to life or liberty of a person) either providing the information on

payment of such fee as may be prescribed or reject the request for any of the reason specified in

Section 8 & 9.

Role of State APIO : -

He will act like a Post Office Duties / Responsibilities to receive information requests from citizen and forwarded these to the

PIO of the concerned public authority that is likely to have the information being sought by the

applicant.

He is not responsible for not giving information to the requester/ applicant (as the responsibility is of PIO)

ASPIO is not an assistant to the SPIO He does not have the power to ask the requestor why he / she wants such information as the act

clearly provide that the requestor shall not be asked to give reason for seeking information.

He is to forward appeal to Department Appellate Authority (DAA) and the State Information Commissioner (SIO) against the decision of PIO.

Note 1:- Sent the application of citizen at once to PIO as under this act only five extra days over and

above the limit of 30 days to give information if the request is forwarded to APIO.

Note 2:- Citizen has the right to send a complaint to SIC if AIPO does not accept the application as forwarded to the PIO. If approved, guilty, APIO may be fined by SIC.

Penalty Provision Section 20 : -

Every PIO will be liable fine of Rs. 250/- per day till the application is received or information is

furnished. The total amount is up to Rs. 25,000/- : -

1) not accepting an application of seeking information without any reasonable cause;

2) has not furnished information within the time schedule under the provisions of RTI (delaying

information);

3) malafide denying information;

4) knowingly giving incomplete, incorrect, misleading information;

5) destroying information which was the subject of the request; (not giving in the form in which it has

been sought.

6) obstruction furnishing of information in any manner.

7) SIC has the power to impose the penalty of fine and can also recommend disciplinary action for

persistent violation of the law against and erroring [section 20 (2)].

Section 20 (2) persistent failure in the part of PIO without any reasonable cause shall require SIC to

recommend disciplinary action against the PIO concerned.

Application (Information requests) Procedure Section 6: -

Citizen who desires to obtain any information under the act:

1) Make request in writing or electronically in English, Hindi or local office language of the area where

the application is being made, accompanying such fee as prescribed to PIO, APIO, specifying the

particulars of the information sought by him.

(Application in writing may be submit personally or electronically or by post or by courier.)

2) application may be presented to PIO/APIO.

3) citizen make request orally to PIO/APIO who must render all reasonable assistance to reduce the

same in writing (Citizen may illiterate, disabled).

4) Reason for seeking information need not be given by the applicant. APIO / PIO also cannot seek

explanation to this effect.

5) Pay fees as may be prescribed (if not belonging to BPL category)

6) Refusal to accept an application without reasonable course is an offence.

7) The act provides the fee should be reasonable (application fee). Note 1: APIO forward such application to the PIO of the Public Authority that controls the Information

requested. Note 2: The PIO directory published by the State Government may be used for this purpose. (Specification of forms of application, acknowledgement, fee etc.) Note: Under section 27 of the RTI Act, 2005, it has been provided that the appropriate Government make rules to carry out the provisions of this act by notifying in the official gazette. Accordingly, the Punjab Government framed, the Right to Information Rules, 2005 vide Notification dated 12.10.2005, revised vide notification 18.12.2006. Again amended vide Notification dated 25.06.2007 and now is called the Punjab Right to Information Rules, 2007. These rules provides as under: -

1) A person who desires to obtain information shall make an application in form A to the PIO

either in person or through registered post alongwith a fee as specified under rule 5 of the

these rules. (the present application fee is Rs. 10)

2) On receipt of an application, the SPIO shall give a receipt in token thereof to the applicant

in form B

3) Each public authority shall maintain the information register in the form C in respect of the

records of requests received from the applicants for seeking information. 4) The application, received without requisite fee, shall not be entertain and shall liable to be

rejected straight way without giving any notice to the applicant.

GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB

DEPARTMENT OF ..

FORM A (See rule 3 (I))

APPLICATION FOR INFORMATION UNDER SECTION 6 (1) OF THE ACT

To The State Public Information Officer/ Assistant State Public Information Officer (Name of the Office with address) .. ..

1. Full name of the applicant : ..

2. Fathers / Spouses name : ..

3. Permanent Address : ..

4. Correspondence Address : ..

5. Particulars of information solicited : ..

a. Subject matter of information : ..

b. The period to which the information relates : ..

c. Specific details of information required : ..

d. Whether information is required by post or in person (The actual postal charges shall be included in providing information)

: ..

e. In case by post then indicate whether by

ordinary, registered or speed.

: ..

6. Is this information not made available by the Public Authority under voluntary disclosure

: ..

7. Do you agree to pay the required fee : ..

8. Have you deposited application fee (If yes details of such deposit)

: ..

9. Whether belongs to Below Poverty Line category. (If yes have you furnished the proof of the same with the application)

: ..

Place Full Signature of the applicant Date: and address. Note: Earlier under Pb. Info. Rules, 2006, particulars of the identity was also included in the proforma. It has also been provided there that incomplete application which has not been given in the prescribed form and received without requisite fee shall not be entertained and shall liable to be rejected straight way without giving notice.

Name of the Department or Public authority .. Form B

(See Rule 3(2)) Acknowledgement

OFFICE OF THE STATE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER Received the application from Mr. / Ms. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Address _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Seeking information on (subject to be specified)_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Vide Diary No. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ dated _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. Place: Date:

Full Name of State Public Information Officer/ Assistant State Public Information Officer,

Designation and Seal

Registering a complete application (in order): -

Enter the details of the application in to the RTI application register on the same day of receiving the application (Form C).

Application received by post / courier / email. Check the particulars of the applicant and fee of the applicant etc.

Note: If the application is ineligible, the details of particulars are missing, proof of application fee (BPL proof etc.) are not found, inform the applicant by post (advisable contact on phone/ email, if given)

If the application is found in order enter in the RTI register and the receipt be issued to the applicant.

Name of the Department or Public Authority ..

FORM C [See rule 3 (3) ]

FORMAT FOR THE INFORMATION REGISTER

Sr. No.

Date of Application

Name of person

requiring the

information

Address of the person

Nature of information

Whether all

formalities have been complied

by the person

requiring the

information

Name of the

authority from which

the information

is to be collected

Date on which the

information shall be supplied

Date on which the authority/

authorities concerned requested to supply

the required information

No. & date of reminder issued

Date on which the

information is received

by the P.I.O. from

the authority/ authorities concerned

Date of supply of

information to the

person concerned

requiring the

information

Reasons in brief for

not supplying

information

Remarks

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Dispatching complete application to the concerned PIO:

i). If the applicant has applied to the APIO, send it to the concerned PIO.

ii). If Information requested is fully or partially held by another Public Authority or the subject matter of

the application is more closely connected with the functioning of another Public Authority, transfer the

application or the relevant part of the application to such Public Authority. Inform the applicant of

such transfer in writing immediately.

iii). If, APIO or PIO receive a request for information that is not available with his office (not his subject

matter) what is likely to available to other office or public Authority, it is a duty of APIO/ PIO to transfer

that request to the concerned PIO or Public Authority. Note: - The PIO directory published by Punjab Government may be used for this purpose. iv). Transfer the application as soon as possible but not later than 5 days from the date of receipt of

application as grace period stipulated in RTI act for communicating this transfer.

Avoidable for PIO/ APIO: -

Dont advice the requestor to approach the concerned Public Authority as he may treat it as a refusal to

accept the application and may send a complaint to the DDA or the SIC.

Fee (Section 7)

Two types of fee (applicant fee and addition fee)

1. The act provides that the application fee must be reasonable.

2. No fee will be charged from people living below the poverty line.

3. If further fees are required, than the same must be intimated by the PIO in writing with calculating the

details of how the figures arrive at. Whether assess to information is to be provided in printed or in any

electronic format, inspection of records etc. as requested by the applicant.

4. Applicant can seek review the decision by applying to the appropriate appellant authority (DDA/SIC)

5. Applicant must be provided information free of cost if the decision to release information is taken after the

time lime.

Fee as laid down in the Punjab Right to Information Rules, 2007 made under this act by notification dated 25.06.2007. These rules made under section 27 of this act. Deposit of Fee/ mode of payment : -

1) Either in cash or by draft or IPO or Cheque or by Treasury Challan

2) The fee shall be in favour of the concerned Drawing and Disbursing Officer from where the information is

to be obtained.

(earlier it was in the favour of Head of the Department / Public Authority concerned)

3) SPIO, on receipt of the application shall, scrutinizing the application and assess how much fee required

to be paid by the applicant for obtaining information.

4) The assessed fee shall be informed to the applicant by PIO within period of ten days from the receipt of

application in Form - D. (earlier it was fifteen days) Note: The Boards / Corporation/ other Autonomous bodies of the State may get the amount of requisite fee deposit in their own account maintained by them.

Through Treasury Challan in the following Head of Account : - Major Head 0070 Other Administrative Services

Sub-Major Head 60 Other Services

Minor Head 800-Other Receipts

Sub-Head 86 Fees under the Right to Information Act

Detailed Head 0070 Other Administrative Services 60 Other Services - 800 Other receipts 86 Fees under the Right to Information Act.

Quantum of fee (as applicable under Public Authorities of Punjab State):-

1) Rs. 10 as application fee ;

2) Rs. 2 for each paper in A4 or A3 size created or copied ;

3) actual charge or cost price of a copy in larger size paper;

4) actual cost or price for samples or models;

5) For information provided in Diskettee or Floppy, Rs. 50 for diskette or Floppy;

6) No fee for inspection of record for the first hour, fee of Rs. 5/- for each 15 minutes (or fraction thereof)

thereafter; and

7) Information seeking in printed form, at the prized fixed for such publication or Rs. 2 per page of photocopy

for extracts from the publication. 8) The applicant while depositing fee shall also submit a self addressed envelope duly stamped for

supplying the information. Stamps on the envelope shall be affixed according to the mode of

supplying the information, as desired by the applicant i.e. through ordinary, registered or speed

post.

Note 1. The fee assessed under the Punjab Right to Information Act, 2007 shall be informed to the

applicant by the PIO in the form D within the period of 15 days from the receipt of application. Note 2. Under the said Rule, the fee collected shall be maintained in the cash register in Form F.

Name of the Department or Public Authority ..

FORM D [See rule 4 (4)]

INFORMATION FOR FEE ASSESSED FOR MAKING PAYMENT

From:

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

(Name and Designation of the State Public Information Officer)

To

Shri _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ (Name of the Applicant & Address)

Subject: Supplying of information under Right to Information Act, 2005 Sir,

Please refer to your application dated _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ addressed to the undersigned

requesting information (subject to be specified) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

2. I am to inform you that the following amount towards cost for providing information may be

deposited by way of Crossed Demand Draft / Bankers Cheque/ IPO/ Cash/ Treasury Challan to enable the

undersigned to furnish the information sought by you.

3. a) the Demand Draft / Bankers Cheque/ IPO should be drawn in favour of (Particulars of the

Drawing and Disbursing Officer of the Officer to be specified) or the amount may be deposited in case with

the said Drawing and Disbursing Officer of this office.

3.b) the amount of fee may also be deposited through Treasury Challan in the following Head of

Accounts: -

Major Head 0070 Other Administrative Services

Sub-Major Head 60 Other Services

Minor Head 800-Other Receipts

Sub-Head 86 Fees under the Right to Information Act

4. A self addressed envelope duly stamped may also be submitted for supplying the requisite

information. Stamps on the envelope may be affixed according to the desired mode of supplying the

information i.e. through ordinary, registered or speed post.

Fee Calculation _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Total amount to be deposited _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Yours faithfully,

Place : Date : Public Information Officer

Name of the Department or Public Authority ..

FORM F [See rule 4 (6)]

CASH REGISTER

Sr. No.

Name & address of the applicant

Date of application

Date of deposit of amount

Particulars of fee: Cash/ Demand Draft/ IPO/ Treasury challan with date & amount

Refund, if any

Remarks

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

There is no fee for listed below poverty line, which facts shall have to be authenticated by producing the BPL Card.

Time Limit (Time Schedule Section 7)

1) 30 days from the receipt of the application received (PIO must decide as early as possible)

2) 48 hours for information concerning the life and liberty of a person (article 21of the Constitution) [sense of

urgency involved in it].

3) The period from the dispatch of the letter of intimating the additional fee by the PIO to the applicant and

the date of payment of fee by the applicant shall be excluded for the purpose of calculating the 30 days

(intervening period).

4) If information sought relates to another public authority (office), five extra days is admissible.

5) If the interest of a third party involved, time limit will be 40 days (maximum period of 30 days + time given

to the third party to make representation)(Section 7 (7) read with section 11)

6) No action taken on application for 30 days is deemed a refusal provision of penalty.

7) If PIO fails to comply the time limit with some reason, the information is to be provided free of cost.

8) If the applicant makes appeal to DAA or SIC about review of the addition fee charged by PIO, the time

spent in this process shall be excluded in time limit

Communicating the applicant

PIO should not wait the time limit of 30 days as the papers of this subject shall pile up and work load will

increase. Take decision as early as possible to provide information by communicating the requestor.

Rejection of Application (Requestor) sub-section 8 of Section 7

PIO is required to communicate to the applicant in writing:

1) The reason/s for rejecting the request

2) The period with which the applicant may appeal against the rejection

3) The particulars of the appellant authority (Name, Designation, address e-mail etc.) Note : Under the Punjab Right to Information Act, 2007, it has been provided that the intimation of rejection shall be communication in the Form E.

Name of the Department or Public Authority ..

FORM E [See rule 4 (5)]

INTIMATION OF REJECTION

From:

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ (Name and Designation of the State Public Information Officer)

To

Shri _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ (Name & address of the applicant) Subject: Supply of information under the Right to Information Act, 2005 Sir, Please refer to your application dated _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ addressed to the undersigned

requesting for the supply of information regarding _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

2. The undersigned regrets to express his inability to furnish the information asked for on

account of the following reasons, namely: -

(i) It comes under the exempted category covered under sections 8 and 9 of the Act.

(ii) Your application was not complete in respect of _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .

(iii) Your identity is not satisfactory.

(iv) The information is contained in published material available to Public.

(v) You did not pay the required fee with your application for providing information.

(vi) The Information sought for is prohibited as per the provisions of section 24 (4) of the Act.

(vii) The information as sought for by you is available in our Website (name of the website to be specified)

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ you may download the information.

(viii) For any other reason_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .

3. However, if you feel aggrieved by this refusal, you may file an appeal before the (specify the

particulars of the Appellate Authority) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ within a period of 30

days of the receipt of this letter.

Place: Name and Designation of

Dated: State Public Information Officer

Exemption (Non- Discloser information/ What is not open)

10 categories in section 8 and 1 in section 9

a) Information that would prejudicially affect the sovereignty, integrity, security, scientific or economic interest and relation with a foreign state;

b) Information whose release is forbidden by a court or tribunal or disclosure which might constitute contempt of court;

c) Information whose release may lead to breach of privileges of Parliament or State Legislatures;

d) Commercial and trade secrets, intellectual property etc. that would harm competitive position of third party unless the competent authority is satisfied that larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information;

e) Information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship unless the competent authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information;

f) Information received in confidence from a foreign government;

g) If information disclosure endangers life and physical safety of any person or identify the source of information or assistance given in confidence for law enforcement or security person;

h) If it is likely to impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders;

i) Cabinet Papers including deliberations of Ministers, Secretaries and other officers; (but decisions and related reasons contained in them will be made public after the decision has been taken and the matter is complete or over); and

j) Information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest or which would cause unwanted invasion of the privacy of the individual. (Personal or private information subject to larger public interest to be decided by the Public Information Officer, the appellant authority.)

Note 1: Section 8 also provides that information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or to the State Legislature shall not be denied to the Information seeker.

Note 2: All exemptions subject to public interest override. If public interest in disclosure outweighs the harm to the protected interest, a public authority may allow to assess information.

Note 3: Subject to the provisions of (a), (c) & (i) above, upon completion of 20 years, information about any occurrence, event or matter will be given irrespective of exemption (information relating to

severity, integrity, security, strategic , scientific and economic interest which lead to incitement to

committee an offence, cabinet paper, including records of deliberations of council of ministers,

secretaries and other officers, and matter relating to the privilege and immunities of legislatures

and MPs will not be given even after 20 years.

Section 9 : PIO has given power to reject, an application seeking access of information if discloser will

infringe upon the copyright of the third party other than the state.

Note: This is also subject to public interest.

Section 10 Partial Discloser : -

Information exempt from discloser under section 8 is partial discloser if a record contain with exempt and non

exempt information. Non exempt information contained in such record may be disclosed upon request.

While communicating the decision to grant partial access to information or record i.e. the SPIO is required to

give in writing: -

1) which part will be provided after severing the exempt portion.

2) reasons for rejecting the request including any factual or material funding the rejection of which is based.

3) name & designation of the person giving other decision for granting partial access.

4) details of fee calculated by the decision making and the amount of fee the applicant is required to deposit.

5) the applicant is regret to see the review of the above decision (want appeal) and the SPIO is to give the

applicant the particulars of the appellate authority (DDA or SIC), time limit of appeal / review, fee charge,

forms that are presented for this purpose etc.

Information to Third Party (anybody other than the applicant making a request for information but includes a public authority) (Section 11) Where the SPIO intends to disclose any information or record or part thereof on a request made under this

act and the information relates to or has been supplied by third party and has been treated as confidential by

the third party PIO shall given written notice to the third party within five days from the information seeker to

make any representation to this effect. Third party may also be informed in this notice particulars of the

appellant authority details of the appeal, appeal process and the time limit for filing the appeal if the decision

taken to disclose the information. Third party shall be given a chance to make representation to the PIO within

ten days of receiving the notice. If the disclosure of the information given by third party is more important in

the public interest as compare to the harm or injury it may cost to the interests of the third party, PIO should

disclose the information to the applicant.

Note: - Trade or commercial secrets protected by law are exempt from disclosure Act not to apply certain organisations (Section 24): -

The intelligence and security organisations specified in the second schedule (22 nos.) being organisation

established by Centre Government.

However, the information relating to the allegations of corruptions, and human rights violations shall be

provided. The permission of CIC is required for providing information relating to allegation of violations of

human rights and forty five days time limit is permissible.

Section 24 (3) provides that the State Government by notifying in the official gazette may specify such

intelligence and security organization. Accordingly, the Punjab Government, Department Information

Technology (Administrative Reforms Branch) vide notification dated 23.02.2006 has provided that the act

shall not apply to the following organisations under the Department of Home Affairs & Justice:

(1) Intelligence Wing,

(2) Armed Police including Armed Battalion of PAP,

(3) Commando and IRB,

(4) Security Wing

(5) District Police and GRP in relation to (a) Matters and issues related with the collection of intelligence and interpretation and discrimination thereof; (b) matters and issued related to the security of an individual installation, premises or organisation,

(6) War time operational plans to the various Battalion of Border Wing, Home Guard,

(7) Civil Defence paper plans of earmarked civil defence towns of Punjab.

The information relating to the allegations of corruptions, and human rights violations shall be provided. The

permission of SIC is required for providing information relating to allegation of violations of human rights and

forty-five days time limit is permissible.

Powers and functions of the State Information Commission (Section 18):

1) SCIC has a duty to receive complaints from any person : -

a) who has not been able to submit an information request because a PIO has not been appointed;

b) who has been refused information that was requested;

c) who has received no response to his/ her information request within the specified time limits;

d) if he/ she thinks the fees charged are unreasonable;

e) if he/ she thinks information given is incomplete or false or misleading;

f) and any other matter relating to obtaining information under this law.

2) Power to order inquiry if there are reasonable grounds;

3) SCIC will have powers of Civil Court such as: -

a) summoning and enforcing attendance of persons, compelling them to give oral or written evidence on oath and to produce documents or things;

b) requesting the discovery and inspection of documents;

c) receiving evidence on affidavit;

d) requisitioning public records or copies from any court or office;

e) issuing summons for examination of witnesses or documents;

f) any other matter which may be prescribed.

4) All records covered by this law (including those covered by exemptions) must be given to SCIC

during inquiry for examination.

Appeal Provision (Section 19):

Any person who does not receive a decision within the time limit under this act or is not satisfied by a decision

of PIO, may file: -

First appeal to the officer immediately senior to PIO in the concerned Public Authority within 30 days

from the date of PIOs decision (delay may be condone by the Appellant Authority if sufficient course is

shown).

External Appeal: - Second Appeal to the SIC/CIC within 90 days from the date on which the

decision was given by the Appellant Authority.

Third Party Appeal: - Against PIOs decision must be filed within 30 days before the first appeals

body and within 90 days of the decision on the first appeal before the appropriate I.C.

Burden of providing the information denial was justified by with the PIO.

Disposal of Appeal: - Internal appeals must be disposed within 30 days from the date of filing

extendable by 15 days if necessary but decision must be given within 45 days. No time limit fixed for Information Commissioner to give their decision.

Decision of Information Commissioner is binding but appeal on a part of fact or law case be filed in the High

Court. Note: During appeal proceeding before State Information Commission, it is the responsibility of

PIO to prove that the rejection of a request was justified. The SCIC has the powers to secure compliance of its decision from the Public Authority: -

a) by providing access to information, in the same form as per request;

b) by appointing a PIO where non exists in a Public Authority;

c) by publishing such information or categories of information;

d) by making necessary changes to its practices in relation to the maintenance, management and destruction of records;

e) by enhancing training provisions for officials on RTI

f) by seeking and annual report from Public Authority on compliance with this law;

g) require the Public Authority to compensate any loss or suffered by the requester;

h) impose any of the penalties under this act;

i) reject the appeal.

Government of Punjab Department of Information Technology

(Administrative Reforms Branch)

Notification

The 25th June, 2007 No. G.S.R./CA22/2005/S-27/2007. In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of

section 27 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (Central Act No. 22 of 2005), and all other powers enabling

him in this behalf, the Government of Punjab is pleased to make the following rules to provide for the matters

specified is sub-section (2) of the said section, namely : -

RULES

1. Short title and commencement:

(1) These rules may be called the Punjab Right to Information Rules, 2007.

(2) They shall come into force on and with effect from the date of their publication in the Official

Gazette.

2. Definitions:

In these rules, unless the context otherwise requires, -

(a) Act means the Right to Information Act, 2005 (Central Act No. 22 of 2005);

(b) Commission means the Punjab State Information Commission, constituted under section 15;

(c) Form means Forms, appended to these rules; and

(d) Section means a section of the Act.

(2) The words and expressions used in these rules, but not defined, shall have the same

meanings as assigned to them in the Act.

3. Application for obtaining information :

(1) A person, who desires to obtain any information admissible under the Act, shall make an

application in Form A to the State Public Information Officer either in person or through

registered post along with a fee, as specified in sub-rule 1 of rule 5 of these rules.

(2) On the receipt of an application, made under sub-rule (1), the State Public Information Officer

shall give a receipt in token thereof to the applicant in Form B.

(3) Each public authority shall maintain the information register in the Form C in respect of the

records of requests received from the applicants for seeking information under the Act.

(4) The application, received without requisite fee, shall not be entertained and shall liable to be

rejected straightway without giving any notice to the applicant.

4. Fee: - (1) The fee may be paid in the following modes, namely

(a) by Crossed Bank Draft/ Bankers Cheque/IPO or in cash in favour of the concerned Drawing and Disbursing Officer from where the information is to be obtained or ;

(b) in cash in favour of the concerned Drawing and Disbursing Officer or;

(c) through Treasury Challan in the following Head of Account : -

Major Head 0070-Other Administrative Services

Sub-Major Head 60-Other Services

Minor Head 800-Fee under the Right to Information Act, 2005

Sub-head 86-Fee under the Right to Information Act, 2005

Detailed Head 0070-Other Administrative Services 60 Other Services - 800 Other receipts 86 Fees under the Right to Information Act, 2005.

(2) The amount of fee shall be credited to the account as referred to sub rule (1).

Provided that the Boards / Corporations and another Autonomous Bodies of the State, may get the amount of requisite fee deposited in their own account maintained by them.

(3) On receipt of an application, submitted under sub-rule (1) of rule 3, the State Public

Information Officer shall scrutinize the application and shall assess how much fee is required

to be paid by the application for obtaining the information.

(4) The fee, assessed under sub-rule (3), shall be informed to the applicant by the State Public

Information Officer in Form D within a period of ten days from the receipt of application.

(5) The intimation of rejection of an application of the applicant seeking information under the

Act, shall be intimated by the concerned State Public Information Officer concerned, in Form

E

(6) The amount of fee collected under this rule, shall be maintained in the cash register as

specified in Form F.

5. Quantum of fee:

(1) An application for obtaining any information under sub-section (1) of section 6, shall be

accompanied with a fee of rupees ten only.

(2) The following fee shall be charged for providing information under sub-section (1) of section

7, namely: -

(a) rupees two for each page (in A-4 or A-3 size paper) created or copied;

(b) actual charge or cost price of a copy in larger size paper;

(c) actual cost or price for samples or models;

(d) for inspection of records, no fee for the first hour; and a fee of rupees five for each fifteen

minutes (or fraction thereof) thereafter;

(e) for information provided in diskette or floppy, rupees fifty per diskette or floppy; and

(f) for information provided in printed form at the price fixed for such publication or rupees two

per page of photocopy for extracts from the publication.

(3) The applicant shall, while depositing fee under sub-rule (2) of rule 4, shall also submit a self addressed envelope duly stamped for supplying the information. Stamps on the envelope shall be affixed according to the mode of supplying the inforation, as desired by the applicant i.e. through ordinary, registered or speed post.

6. Procedure to be followed in deciding appeal:

Before deciding an appeal, the Commission shall, -

(a) serve notice to the concerned persons;

(b) entertain any evidence in support of appeal, which may be oral or in writing from the

concerned persons;

(c) examine on oath or by having affidavits from the persons concerned;

(d) persue or inspect the documents or any records or copies thereof;

(e) inquire through the authorized officer, the facts of an appeal or may require facts in detail, if it

so deems appropriate, hear the State Public Information Officer or officer senior in rank to

State Public Information Officer, who had decided the first appeal, or any other officer or

persons authorised in this behalf ; and

(f) receive evidence on affidavits from the officer senior in rank to State Public Information

Officer, who had decided the first appeal or any other officer or person authorized in this

behalf from whom the evidence may be deemed necessary.

7. Mode of serving notice: -

The Commission may serve notice to the persons concerned in any of the following modes, namely: -

(a) by hand delivery (dasti) through process server; or

(b) by registered post with acknowledgement due; or

(C) by publication in the newspaper.

8. Order by the Commission:

(1) The Commission shall make order in writing and pronounce the same on merits by following

the due procedure.

(2) After the decision is pronounced by the Commission, it shall intimate the same to the

complainant and the State Public Information Officer of the Department or the public authority

concerned.

9. Repeal and Saving:

The Punjab Right to Information Rules, 2006, are hereby repealed:

Provided that any order made or action taken under the rules so repealed, shall be deemed to have

been made or taken under the corresponding provisions of these rules.

Note:- The Forms A to F mentioned under these rules have been incorporated at page No. 9, 10, 12, 15, 16, and 18.

Some decisions of Central Information Commission (CIC) and Punjab State Information Commission (SIC): -

1. April 06, 2007, Supreme Court Official told to appear before Chief Information Commissioner: CIC

has directed/ PIO and Additional Registrar of the Supreme Court to appear personally before

Commission on May 25, 2007 and also issued show cause notice as to why a penalty of Rs. 250 /-

per day from the date when the information was due to the date when it actually supplied should not

be imposed under section 20 (1). The information sought by Mr. Ziley Singh, a village near Delhi.

2. The Delhi High Court directed the UPSC on April 17, 2007 to make public the cut-off marks obtained

by candidates in preliminary test of the Civil Services examination. Disclosure of information as

directed by CIC cannot harm the interest of the UPSC and any third party. The approach of the CIC

in this matter has been in correct perspective, Justice B.D. Ahmed said while upholding the order of

the CIC, which had directed the commission to reveal the marks. The Court also rejected the

contention of the government body that the scaling system followed by it was very confidential and it

was their intellectual property which could not be revealed. For scaling system nothing further

needs to be done as in may view the same already stands disclosed by the UPSC in the affidavit filed

by it in the Supreme Court, the court said after going through various affidavits filed by it in the apex

court. Justice Ahmed, before whom the commission had placed its method of scaling system in a

sealed envelop, found that there was nothing special in it and the same system was followed all over

the world.

Now the UPSC has challenged the order of Delhi High Court in the Honble Supreme Court in May

07.

3. CIC issued a notice on Foreign Secretaries appointment on April 14, 2007. The Govt. of India, appointed Shri Shankar Menon as Foreign Secretary in November, 2006 by superseding 16 Officers

including Ms. Sikri, High Commissioner, Banladesh who sought pre-mature retirement as a protest.

She represented the Government on this issue but did not get satisfactory reply.

In March 2007, she made an appeal with CIC requesting that she wanted to inspect all files dealing

with the appointments as she was one year senior and wanted to see Noting file to know how he had

aged past her, as to whether the rules and procedures by the Govt. in processing the appointment of

Menon who supersede 16 officers. CIC issued notice to the officers in the PMOs, Cabinet Secretary,

Deptt of Personnel, External Affairs Ministry to appear on April 24, 2007 for hearing Ms. Sikris

appeal.

CIC panel comprising Chief Information Commissioner, Wajahat Habibullah and Commissioner,

O.P.Kajariwal heard this case on April 24, 2007. The PMO refused to part with the information on the

ground that the file notings regarding the appointments of FS are not covered under the RTI as such

a discloser would lead to unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the Individual IFS Officers screened

for the post of Foreign Secretary. (The PMO observed that revelation of personal information

regarding candidates consider for the post of FS did not have any relationship with public activity or

interest and said discloser of such information would amount to unwarranted invasion of the privacy

of other individuals in the zone of consideration) The Cabinet Secretariat also opposed discloser of

information and argued that Cabinet Papers were immune under RTI and should not be putting in

public domain.

CIC, however, observed that there should be no harm in disclosing such information. The entire

issue is in public domain and has reserved its orders.

Now Ms. Minu Sikri filed another complaint with CIC about a case of gender bias in Ist week of May

2007. The CIC on May 6 asked the Cabinet Secretary to produce all the documents pertaining to the

appointment of Shri Shive Shanker Menon as Foreign Secretary in a sealed cover on May 17, 2007.

CIC also directed the External Affairs Ministry to allow inspection within 15 days by Ms. Sikri of the file

on ACRs pertaining to the promotion of Foreign Secretary. The decision is pending.

4. CIC fined Satya Thakur, Under Secretary (Home)-cum-PIO on on account of delay in providing information to a local resident under the RTI and latter after considering the representation of PIO

stayed its own order on 8 May, 07.

When Mahor Singh sought information which involved gathering data from different deptts of UT. But

certain records were not available with the custodians of information which became a major basis for

this order. When Mahor Singh was denied information by Under Secretary (Home) cum-PIO, he

filed an appeal with Joint Secretary (Home) who passed order that since the record was not available

and as such it could be said to have been denied information and the delay had occurred because of

late receipts from other departments of secretariat. However, CIC ordered that whatever is available

with the public office that has to be supplied.

Later the Under Secretary made an representation to the CIC saying that he has acted as per

provisions of the act under provision 5(4). The CIC stayed its earlier order on 08.05.2007 till the

matter was being looked into representation.

5. Shri Haqiqat Singh, Village Mohali had sought some information on certain items vide his application

dated 17.08.2006 under RTI Act, 2005 from PIO office of SSP, Mohali. Shri Surjit Singh, Head

Constable on behalf of the PIO and told the commission that the information demanded has been

supplied. However, complainant stated that information on one specific item relating to affidavit

submitted by him has still not been given. State Information Commission (Shri Rajan Kahyap, CIC,

Surinder Singh, IC, Lt. Gen. P.K. Grover (Retd), IC) directed SSP, Mohali to give a personal hearing

to the complainant on 7.03.2007 at 11.00 AM to satisfy him and deliver whatever information

remains. The next date fixed for 11.04.2007.

On 11.04.2007, again Head Constable on behalf of PIO-SSP appeared and the complainant also

attended. The complainant stated that he was heard by the SSP, Mohali on the appointed the

appointed date. The SSP, Mohali had asked the DSP, Kharar to look into the matter. According to

the complainant, the matter is still unresolved and the information has still not been delivered. The

Head constable states that during the personal hearing before the SSP, Mohali on 7.3.2007, the

complainant had made a fresh demand for information, which is to be considered as a separate RTI

application, in his affidavit, the PIO is free to clarify the matter as to whether a fresh demand for

information has been made. In response to this, the Commission observed that (1) the respondent

has taken a casual attitude to the RTI Act. The Act clearly postulates that the information is to be

delivered where demanded within the time prescribed; (2) Merely making a paper for disposal to a

subordinate authority does not amount to fulfilment of the responsibility of the PIO. (3) A Junior

Official of the level of the Head Constable has been deputed to present the case of the PIO SSP.

This is unacceptable to the commission. No representative lower than an APIO should be deputed at

the hearing before the Commission.

The Commission further observed that in so far as the delivery of information in question is

concerned, it is not for the Commission to indicate or direct the procedure to be adopted by the Public

Authority in this behalf. This is squarely the responsibility of PIO. The Commission directed that

whatever means are employed, SSP, Mohali (Shri R.S.Khaira) should ensure that the information

demanded is delivered to the complainant at his residence and the complainant will not come to the

Police Station for this purpose. The Commission also ordered that SSP, Mohali would submit an

affidavit before the next date of hearing i.e. 30.05.2007, showing cause as to why penalty be not

imposed on him for failure to deliver the information demanded.

On 30.05.2007, none was present on behalf of the PIO-SSP. The complainant stated that he has not

received the information, the commission observed that the two directions have also not been

complied with and it appears that the directions have not been treated with the seriousness required

by law. Therefore, the commission directed that on the next date that is 27.06.2007, the SSP, Mohali

should personally present and should also supply the information as demanded. Before taking the

final decision on imposition of penalty, the commission gave another opportunity to the respondent

SSP to appeal personally before the commission on 27.06.2007. The DGP was requested by the

Commission to ensure the presence of SSP, Mohali on the said date. The SSP appeared on

27.6.2007.

6. Shri K.R.Bishist, a former SE, PWD (B & R) made a request to PIO in the office of Secretary to Govt.

of Punjab, Deptt of PWD (B & R) for delivering him copies of ACRs for the year 1992-93 and 1997-

98. PIO initially maintain that the ACR was not traceable and did not provide the same. Bishist made

a complaint before the PSIC and the commission vide order dated February 6, 2007 asked PIO to

give the same.

PIO made the representation before the commission by seeking exemption from the discloser of the

ACRs on the ground that this was personal information as defined under section 8 (1)(j) of RTI ACT.

He further made a plea that the issue as to whether the ACRs could be disclosed was pending before

the the three members bench of commission and the final decision was awaited.

However, the applicant contested the arguments of PIO and said that claim of exemption was an after

thought and it was not open to PIO to make a fresh plea now and further asserted that the

commissions order dated 06.02.2007 had given a finality to the direction of the case which could not

be revoked now. Admitting the complainants assertion, the commission said the PIO plea for

exemption could not be entertained at a stage when it has already issued an order directing the PIO

to divulge the information sought from him. The commission on April 16, 2007 directed the PIO to file

an affidavit within a week explaining why penalty should not be imposed upon him for not supplying

the information sought under RTI.

The ACRs were provided to the applicant. The PIO made representation to the commission that his

intention was not malafide and vital issue was involved under section 8 and as such he approach the

commission to reconsider its decision and made some other submission. The SIC filed the case.

7. RTI, record missing, probe-sought

Lalit Sharma, who was the General Secretary, Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering & Technology

made a representation to the President of India on June 11, 2004, urged him to take appropriate

action in connection with the alleged recruitments scandal took place between 1997 to 2000 and due

to this about three thousand candidates has suffered. The President Office asked the then Chief

Secretary to take the necessary action on this complaint. When no response has been received, he

sought the information under RTI Act from the Office of Chief Secretary. Again he did not receive the

information. He approached the State Information Commission. Commission send the notice to the

Principal Secretary, Deptt of Technical Education asked the staff to find out the relevant record.

When no record could be located, the Principal Secretary had written a complaint to the SSP,

Chandigarh to register an FIR and subsequently investigate a matter pertaining to the misplacement

of the office record of the Department. The SIC has also been informed to this effect.

8. SIC fined Dera Bassi BDPO of Rs. 25,000/- on 11.05.2007. A Nagla based NGO (The Gram Jan

Kalyan Sanstha) through its president Satya Bhatia of Dera Bassis sought information from BDPO

about development works carried out in the village through Government grants and Panchayat funds

as NGO alleged irregularties in the spending of the funds. When the BDPO failed to provide

information, the NGO filed an appeal with the PSIC. The commission sought the reply from the

BDPO. The BDPO informed the commission that the requisite information has been supplied to NGO

President in a letter dated 14.11.2006. However, the complainant contested this information and

again approached the commission. The commission asked the NGO to file another application with

the BDPO on April 5, however, the BDPO failed to provide the information. The commission held the

BDPO guilty of delaying information and fined Rs. 25,000/- chaired Ms. Rupan Deol Bajaj and Mr.

Ravi Singh. Meanwhile, the BDPO (present) claimed that the case pertaining to the tenure of the

previous BDPO.

9. Shri Paramjit Singh, Science Master Vs. Secretary (Education), Punjab

The complainant vide his application dated July 20, 2006 duly accompanied by a requisite fees

sought a information relating to his complaint made against Shri Balbir Singh Saini, Principal, Govt.

Sr. Sc. School of District Nawanshehr. When he did not receive the information, he made the

complaint to the SIC, Punjab. On November 15, 2006, the Commission heard this case. The

complainant was not present. Whereas Shri Madan Lal, APIO/DEO (Secondry) for the respondant

department was present. The APIO admitted that the information was not supplied. The Commission

found from the record that only interim communication dated 29.09.2006 has been made by the

Superintendent (Branch-IV) with a copy to the Commission, wherein it has been directed that the

necessary information should be supplied. The Commission noticed that neither the information was

supplied nor the PIO/office of the Secretary, Deptt. of Education cared to file a response to the notice

from the commission dated 11.09.2006. Shri Madan Lal, APIO on this date 15.11.2006 has brought

with him the copy of the Inquiry Report carried out upon the complaint of Shri Paramjit Singh

conducted by Deputy Director (Education). However, the PIO has not brought the supporting

documents with the inquiry report which is incomplete. He has also brought a final order passed by

the Secretary (Education) after the inquiry report. These documents were not attested to the true

copies. The Commission observed that if these papers have been filed for the information of the

Court, there is no reason why these should not have been supplied to the applicant and the APIO is

now directed to supply full information as is required in the application dated 20.07.2007 of Shri

Paramjit Singh, including the statements of the witnesses and other attending papers of the Inquiry

Report. The commission directed that the papers supplied should be attested to be true copies and

these should also be filed in this court for record. This may be done definetly by 23.11.2006 and

compliance report filed in this Court on 29.11.2006 without fail.

On 29.11.2006, none for the complainant was present whereas Ms. Balbir Kaur, Sr. Assistant for the

Department (authorised vide on file) and Shri Vishal Shingari, Clerk with her were present. The

representative of DPI stated that a person has been deputed with these papers orders by the

commission to supply to the complainant today, who has not yet returned to submit the report and

therefore, the compliance report cannot be filed. The commission observed this is not at all

satisfactory since the order has been passed on 15.11.2006 that the papers were to be supplied by

23.11.2006 and compliance report to be filed on 29.11.2006 without fail. The Commission also find

that the directions issued by the Superintendent, Branch IV on behalf of PIO of the Education

Department on 29.09.2006 have not been complied with and it is no use issuing directions which are

not acted upon. The Commission ordered that the PIO of the Directorate as well as the Department

of Education are directed to file the Compliance report immediately and also to show cause why

proceedings under Section 20 of the RTI Act, 2005 be not initiated against them and the next date

fixed for 24.1.2007.

On 24.1.2007, none for the complainant were present, Shri Pritam Singh, Superintendent, Office of

DPI and Shri Vishal Shingari, Clerk was present. The Commission noted that the two persons

present were also present on the last occasion have made a completely different report regarding the

status of the report. The Commission found that the applicant has been informed by letter 9.1.2007

that he should deposit Rs. 2/- per page for 41 pages so that the information can be supplied. The

Commission observed that it is rather strange that the fee which is to be asked for under Section 7 (3)

of the Act within 30 days of the receipt of the request, which was made on July 20.2006, is now being

sought after the issue of direction by this court on 15.11.2006, as 29.11.2006. The Commission

pointed out section 7 (6) wherein it is provided that the person making request for the information

shall be provided information free of charge where a public authority fails to comply with the time limit.

The Commission concluded that the representative of the PIO have been making false and

misleading statements personally and therefore, they are hereby given an opportunity show cause

why action as specified under section 20 should not be taken against both of them and in case no

explanations are filed and they do not appear, the action will be taken ex-parte. Note: The complainant or on his behalf did not appear on the three dates, even than the Commission

heard this case under the spirit of RTI. 10. Shri M.R. Singh (Retd. XEN) complainant Vs. PIO O/O Joint Secretary, Irrigation Deptt., Punjab. (CC

No. 345 of 2006)

On 21.09.2006, the respondents stated that the information required by the complainant is nor clear;

otherwise they are prepared to provide the same. The precise information required by the complainant was

therefore confirmed by this court and it is as follows:

(1) It is a fact that the placement of the complainant in PSE-II has been approved by the PPSC, on the basis of his promotion to PSE-II i.e. w.e.f. 5.7.1971?

(2) It is a fact that the department has filed an affidavit in the Punjab & Haryana High Court, in which it was stated that the Complainant among other petitioners, has been placed in PSE-II w.e.f. the dates of their promotion?

(3) The reason for giving effect to promotion in PSE-II w.e.f. 9.1.1982 instead of 5.7.1971.

The Commission directed the respondent to supply the above information to the complaint within 15 days of

the receipt of these orders and the next date fixed for 19.10.2006 for confirmation of compliance.

On the next date, the complainant was present, and on behalf of the respondent, Ms. Harmindor Kaur, Sr.

Assistant. The defendant representing the PIO requested for more time for collecting the information. The

Commission was of the view that the request for additional time was not reasonable as the answers were to

be provided seems neither to long nor complicated that they could not be given within fifteen days which was

allowed. The commission ordered that the PIO / Shri Samir Kumar, IAS, Special Secretary, Irrigation Deptt.,

Punjab is given an opportunity of show cause on the next date of hearing i.e. 9.11.2006 as to why the penalty

of Rs. 250/- for each day that the order of this court were not complied with and the required information was

not given to the complainant, till the date that this is done, should not be imposed upon him.

On next date 9.11.2006, the complainant was present, whereas Shri Samir Kumar, Special Secretary and

Shri Shyam Lal, Deputy Secretary were present. The commission observed that the nature of information

required by the complainant being the same/ similar of all three cases (No. CC 291, 345 & 346) and are being

dealt with by this single order. The complainant is not entirely satisfied with the information which has been

provided. As a result, the respondent has been revised to come again closely to scrutinizing the points raised

by the complainant in the three cases and revised his reply to ensure that they are relevant and to the point.

The explanation submitted by PIO, Special Secretary Irrigation for the delay caused in furnishing the required

information has been scrutinized and found to be satisfactory and proceedings initiated against him are

therefore dropped. The commission further advised to the respondent to furnish the relevant reply , wherever

necessary, to the complainant before the next date of hearing fixed for 14.12.2006. On this date non on

behalf of the complainant or respondent was present. Since the respondent has informed the commission

that the replies to CC 291, 345 & 346 was already sent to the complainant, the complainant is not present, no

further action is required and the matter is disposed off.

11. Smt. Manjit Kaur Vs. PIO DPI (Secondary), Punjab. In her complaint dated 11.09.2006, to the

Commission, she has stated that she made an application under RTI to the DPI on August 4, 2006 along with

the demand draft of Rs. 50/- but no response has been received. She has asked information on six points

detailed therein. The Commission sent the complaint to the PIO for response within 15 days with a copy

enclosed to the commission. The PIO directed the Superintendent, Ministerial Staff to deliver the information

within a week . In the meanwhile, Manjit Kaur vide letters dated 23.10.2006 and 12.12.2006 stated that she

has still not received any information The matter was entrusted to the Commission Bench on 23.1.2007. The

superintendent Branch In charge of Ministerial Employees and was the authorized representative of PIO has

stated that the information has been supplied on 5 out of 6 points and the copy of the same has been

presented for record of the court. Only one point relating to character verification, the report is awaited from

DEO, Hoshiarpur, who is being reminded for the same, however, the full staff being busy on election duty,

some time may be given, the commission ordered that the said information should be provided under due

receipt of all the documents without fail by March 23 2007 and the compliance report be filed on March 23

2007. On March 28, 2007, the complainant was not present whereas Shri H.S. Sandhu PIO-Asstt. Director

DPI and Shri Pritam Singh Superintend were present. The Superintend present the compliance report

alongith the photocopies of the receipt from the complainant regarding the six documents supplied to her and

the copy supplied to the Court for record. the commission observed that Smt Manjit Kaur has been duly

informed about the hearing for 28.03.3007 and as she has not turned up, it is therefore presumed that she

has nothing to say and thus the complaint is therefore disposed off.