Friday 21 November 2014

RTI Myth or Reality? Do you find response of CPIO, Department of Posts relevant to order of First Appellate Authority

A post on 19th November 2014 is RTI Application dtd. 03/09/2014. Irrelevant response of CPIO compelled me to Appeal before First Appellate Authority of Department of Post. The appeal and order of First Appellate Authority is posted on 20th November 2014. Here is a response from Department of Posts in compliance of the order of First Appellate Authority. It is followed by a 2nd Appeal before Central Information Commission (CIC)

"
No : CR-3/RTI-269/2014 dated at Delhi-110051 the                                             Dated 07-11-2014

Sub: Information under RTI Act 2005 – case of Sh. S.K. Virmani
            The 1st appellate authority Shri Adnan Ahmed, DPS (O), % The Chief Postmaster General, Delhi Circle, New Delhi-110001 vide his office letter No. PG/RIA/B-II-312/2014 dated 30.10.2014 has ordered to CPIO for providing complete information to RTI Applicant.
            As per office record article u/r was received on 26.08.2014 at Laxmi Nagar PO as missent and dispatch to AMPC New Delhi-110037 on 28.08.2014, but this office is unable to ascertain the correct reason for its return to other office being misspent article.
            You are requested to supply the photo copy of envelop of the said article to access the complete information in this regard as the correct reason/remark appear to be given on envelope of the said article at the time its return.

                                                                                                                     Sr. Supdt. of Post Offices
                                                                                                                              Delhi East Division
                                                                                                                                       Delhi-110051
"

Copy of 2nd Appeal before Central Information Commission 

                                                                                                                      18/11/2014

Sub: Second appeal in respect of my RTI application dated 03/09/2014 in respect of Speed Post Docket No. ED342229883IN - Non-supply of information despite FAA order dtd. 30/10/2014


References:
Sl. No.
Description
Page No.
1
RTI Application dated 03/09/2014
1
2.
CPIO Ref. No. RTI/NDCD/273/14-15 dated 29/09/2014
2-3
3.
CPIO Letter No. CR-3/RTI-269/2014 dated 14/10/2014
4
4.
FA dated 23/10/2014
5-6
5.
FAA Order No. PG/RIA/B-II-312/2014 dated 30/10/2014
7
6.
DOP Letter No. CR-3/RTI-269/2014 dated 07/11/2014
8
7.
Telephonic call from Mr. Sudhir Sharma on 03/11/2014 from Telephone No. 011-22376395

Dear Sir,

1.       I have submitted an application under RTI Act 2005 to CPIO, Department of Post, New Delhi as referred at Sl. No. 1 above.
2.       CPIO at Sl. No. 2 and 3 responded with their letter as referred at Sl. No. 2 and 3 above. However, no relevant information has been received except partial information in respect of point No. 1 (a).
3.       Finding no relevant responses as sought from CPIO vide RTI application dtd. 03/09/2014, the First Appeal was preferred before First Appellate Authority at Sl. No. 4 above.
4.       First Appellate Authority had concurred with the contentions raised by the applicant and has ordered accordingly. The relevant points of the order are quoted below:-

“Sh. S.K. Virmani preferred present appeal dated 23.10.2014 and appeals that; there is no relation between the statement of CPIO/SSPOs, East Dn and what he has sought for in point no 1 (b) to (e). And he has requested for photocopies of all the documents sought in his RTI application in respect of point no (b) to (e). As the information has been provided to him after the stipulated time, hence no additional fee is payable towards photocopy charges as per the provisions of RTI Act 2005.”

“The Undersigned has examined the initial RTI application and both the CPIOs reply and present appeal and is of the view that, the CPIO has not provided the available information to the appellant. Hence, the CPIO/SSPOs, Delhi East Dn, Delhi-110051 is directed to re-examine the case and provide the information sought for and documents to the appellant within a fortnight positively.”

5.       The applicant received a telephone call on 03/11/2014 from one Mr. Sudhir Sharma stating to be from Krishna Nagar, Post Office on the mobile of the applicant from a number 011-22376395 who sought additional information from the applicant. Even though the said information as sought by Mr. Sudhir Sharma was not relevant to be asked, the applicant still provided the information and confirmed that Docket No. of the article which is a subject matter of RTI Application pertain to an article consigned for “Bombay Fashion, F-147B, Nangal Bazar, Jagat Ram Park, Laxmi Nagar, New Delhi”. The first reaction to the provisioning of the details of the consignee was that the consignee falls in their jurisdiction. Even though the CPIO had responded vide his letter dated 14/10/2014 stating the article was received as missent, he confirmed that the article pertain to his jurisdiction. The applicant requested to supply the photocopies of all the documents which are relevant to the said docket no., details of the Post Man and articles delivery chart report of all the dockets meant for delivery on 27/08/2014 including that of the said article no. under reference. As stated above, the First Appellate Authority has also been of the view that CPIO has not provided the available information to the applicant i.e. photocopies of all the records mentioned at 1(b) to (e) of my RTI Application dated 03/09/2014.
6.       It seems that CPIO/ and the concerned officials are trying to hide the crucial information and hence have sent letter dated 07/11/2014 asking for photocopy of the envelope of the said article despite conveying the information about consignee through telephonic discussion on 03/11/2014. The applicant tried to contact Mr. Sudhir Sharma on telephone no. 011-22376395 on 17th and 18th November, 2014 and a minimum of 40 attempts must have been made to contact him on the above dates but none of the call was picked up.
7.       While I have stated the address of the consignee, seeking copy of the envelope has no meaning or of relevancy to the information sought. The envelope might have been stating the reason of return of the article but it is also a fact that I have no where sought the reason of return of the article in the present RTI application under reference and hence seeking copy of the envelope and then expressing inability “to ascertain the correct reason for its return to other office being misspent article” is to mislead the applicant and other departmental officials. When the Department of Posts has already been intimated the details of the consignee and consignee falling in the same jurisdiction, the Department of Posts should have identified the name of the Post Man on duty to that area and who ight have been given the number of articles for delivery between 26th and 28th August, 2014 including that of 27th August 2014 being crucial date. After identification of the name of the Post Man (even though seeking the name of the Post Man was also a subject matter of information sought by the applicant at point no. 1(b)), the Department of Post should have been able to retrieve copies of all reports including that of articles delivery chart report (where the signatures of recipients are taken) including all the articles handed over to him for delivery on those three days. The purpose of seeking copy of the envelope is of no meaning to the context of RTI application and moreover the envelope is a crucial document to prove possible nexus of the Postal Department. It is also pertinent to thought process as to how and on what basis and records; the CPIO responded to RTI application that the article was missent. Was it a casual furnishing of information under RTI Act 2005?  Let those documents be also placed on the table and shared with the Applicant.
8.       In view of the points as stated above, I appeal Second Appellate Authority to kindly arrange for the requisite information as per my RTI Application dated 03/09/2014 including supply of the articles delivery report of the postman on duty with the concerned area of 26th , 27th  and 28th August, 2014 as per points 1 (b) to 1 (e) of my RTI application.
9.       A copy of the 2nd Appeal is being sent to CPIO with a request that all connected documents be kept under safe custody till disposal of 2nd Appeal. It is pertinent to state that the period of fortnight as per FAA order is already over and DoP officials are trying to waste time and energy in diverting the subject.
Non-supply of information has already caused me to incur an amount of Rs.1,000/- towards postage, secretarial, legal and stationary expense which need to be considered for reimbursement. It is also beyond doubt that the information is not being provided intentionally diverting the attention by irrelevant reasoning, the penalty as provided under RTI Act may be imposed. 

Thursday 20 November 2014

First Appeal and FAA order - Department of Posts

Not getting information from CPIO to RTI application dtd. 03/09/2014, a first appeal before First Appellate Authority was filed on 23/10/2014. The content of the same are reproduced.
"

Sub: First appeal against RTI application dated 03/09/2014 in respect of Speed Post Docket No. ED342229883IN                                                                   

Ref. 1. CPIO/Supdt. Of Post Offices, New Delhi Central Division, New Delhi-110 001
        2. CPIO/Sr. Supdt of Post, Delhi East Division, Delhi-110 051

Dear Sir,
            I have sought information under RTI Act 2005 vide my application dated 03/09/2014 (copy attached). CPIO as referred at S.No. 1 above vide his Letter No. RTI/NDCD/273/14-15 dated 29/09/2014 (copy attached) has responded w.r.t Point No. (a) of RTI Application. However, for Point Nos. (b) to (e) of my RTI application, CPIO further stated in his response that the matter pertains to the Sr. Superintendent of Post Office, New Delhi, East Division, New Delhi – 110 051 for which the application was transferred to the concerned CPIO vide Letter No. RTI/NDCD/273/14-15 dated 15/09/2014.
            CPIO, East Division vide his Letter No. CR-3/RTI-269/2014 dated 14/10/2014 (copy attached) has responded pretending to have supplied information for Point No. (b) to (e) of RTI Application dated 03/09/2014. However, it is better to be pretended than supplying as:-
1.      There is no relation to the statement of CPIO, East Division what has been stated in his response to what has been sought at Point No. (b) to (e).
2.      I have categorically requested for the photocopies of listing of the articles to be delivered on 27/08/2014 (Point b and c) by the said Post Man. No information about the name of the Post Man (as per point b) has been given. Similarly, no information as per point d and e has been given. Avoiding reference to the date of 27/08/2014 seems to be intentional. The information pertaining to the date 27/08/2014 is crucial to the subject of RTI application and has been sought categorically. Similarly all the documents pertaining to 27/08/2014 and the name of the postman is crucial part of the information being sought.  Please also supply me the photocopies of the information that has been stated to be received by CPIO, East Division from the SPM, Krishna Nagar, HPO as the intentional suppression of crucial information is not being ruled out. This document is in addition to whatever the documents I have requested at Point No. (b), (c), (d) and (e) as CPIO, East Division has stated reference of SPM, Krishna Nagar, HPO in the above letter dated 14/10/2014.
3.      Please supply me the photocopy of all the documents as requested by me vide RTI Act in respect of Point No. (b), (c), (d) and (e). It may please be noted that the said CPIO, East Division have failed to supply me the information within 30 days of receiving RTI Application. Hence, no additional fee is payable towards photocopy charges as per the provision of RTI Act 2005.
4.      First Appellate Authority is requested to kindly arrange for release of information and documents as sought by me under RTI Act 2005. Since the information has been intentionally avoided due to some malafide intention,  please supply me the complete file notings in connection with the said RTI Application. The information and documents as sought under the RTI Act may be supplied to me by Speed Post at the following address.
"

FAA order:

"    " Shri S.K.Virmani ............................... filed an RTI application dated 03.09.2014 to the CPIO/SSPOs, New Delhi Central Dn, New Delhi-110001 and sought information on 01(a, b, c, d & e) and 02 points regarding speed post article No. ED342229883IN dispatched from Indraprastha HPO addressed to Bombay Fashion.

The CPIO/SSPOs, New Delhi Central Dn, New Delhi-110001 forwarded the copy of RTI application to the CPIO/SSPOs, Delhi East Dn, Delhi-110051 to provide the information to the appellant on point no.1 (b,c,d & e) on 15.09.2014 and has provided the information to the appellant on point no.1 (a) vide letter no. RTI/NDCD/273/14-15 on 29.09.2014.

The CPIO/SSPOs, Delhi East Dn, Delhi-110051 has provided the information to the appellant vide letter no. CR-3/RTI-269/2014 dated 14.10.2014 that the SPA no. ED342229883IN was received on 26.08.2014 as misspent and dispatched to AMPC New Delhi-110037 on 28.08.2014.

Sh. S.K. Virmani preferred present appeal dated 23.10.2014 and appeals that; there is no relation between the statement of CPIO/SSPOs, East Dn and what he has sought for in point no 1 (b) to (e). And he has requested for photocopies of all the documents sought in his RTI application in respect of point no (b) to (e). As the information has been provided to him after the stipulated time, hence no additional fee is payable towards photocopy charges as per the provisions of RTI Act 2005.

The Undersigned has examined the initial RTI application and both the CPIOs reply and present appeal and is of the view that, the CPIO has not provided the available information to the appellant. Hence, the CPIO/SSPOs, Delhi East Dn, Delhi-110051 is directed to re-examine the case and provide the information sought for and documents to the appellant within a fortnight positively.

Appeal is accordingly disposed off.

Second appeal in the case lies before the Central Information Commission, Block No. IV (5th Floor) Old JNU Campus, New Delhi-110067 within a period of 90 days of receipt 

Next Post: CPIO Response to FAA order