[HumJanenge] Order of Central Information Commission - for info

IN my RTI activity, I got the following reply, which is self explanatory:-

 

In the Central Information Commission
                                        at

New Delhi

 

File No; CIC/AD/C/2011/001736

Date of Decision     :  Jan,   11, 2012.

 

Parties:

Complainant

Mr. M Rangarajan

B 2-301, Sriram Spandhana, CheMaghatta Village,

Bangalore 560037 Karnataka

 

Respondent

PIO,

M/s. Braithwaite and Company Ltd. Ministry of Railways

5, Hide Road,

Kolkata - 700 043

 

 

 

 

 

Information Commissioner(s)                              Mrs. Annapurna Dixit

 

Page 2

In the Central Information Commission
                                         at

New Delhi

 

File No: CIC/AD/C/2011/001736

ORDER

Background

1.           The Applicant filed an RTI application dated 10.09.2011 seeking information about

retirement benefits and pension scheme granted to retired employees and requested to be furnished with copies of documents indicating retirement benefits, relevant office orders to that effect, pension scheme, instructions in the form of office orders issued for utilization of Fund created for the welfare of retired employees and some other related information in a tabular form indicating statistical utilization of the said fund during the past two years, The S.O. from the Braithwaite Company responded by a letter dated 14.09.2011 seeking identification proof of the Applicant.

 

2.           Aggrieved with the response of the Company, the Applicant approached, the Central

Information Commission with the current Complaint dated 22.09.2011 narrating the

events which led to the filing of the instant Complaint.

 

Decision

 

3.           The facts of the case indicate clearly that the response of the Respondent Company is

not in keeping with the provisions nor the spirit of the RTI Act. There is no provision in the RTI Act to seek identification of a citizen who seeks information from any Public Authority. The PIO of the Company is warned not to seek such identification in future u/s 3 of the RTI Act, which stipulates that all citizens shall have the Right to Information, as it would be construed by the Commission as deemed denial.

 

4.            Since the Appellant has not exhausted the first Appellate channel available to him for

seeking information and has approached the Commission directly, the case is being remanded back to the First Appellate Authority directing him to treat the complaint as a first appeal and to take a decision on the matter by issuing a speaking order. The PIO may forward the case along with a copy of this Order to the concerned First Appellate Authority within 5 days of receipt of this order.

 

5.           The case is disposed on the above terms.

(Annapurna D)

Information Commissioner

Authenticated true copy:

^/

(G.Subramanian)
Deputy Registrar

 

 

Page 3

 

Cc:

 

Mr. M Rangarajan

B 2-301, Sriram Spandhana, Cheflaghatta Village,

Bangalore - 560 037 Karnataka

2.                         PIO,

                                                                        M/s.  Braithwaite and Company Ltd. (with a copy of the case)

                                                                        Ministry of Railways

                                                                5 Hide Road,  Kolkata - 700 043

 

                                  3.                    Officer in Charge, NIC