Dated 23-10-2007

Name of the Complainant:
Sri Saitya Ranjan Saikia
Joint Secretary, Teok Press Club, Teok
Jorhat - 785112, Dist. Jorhat, Assam

Name of the Public Authority:
PD, DRDA, Jorhat

The following were present:
1. J. Sonowal, CEO, ZP, Jorhat
2. P. Barua, PD, DRDA, Jorhat

The complainant absent with steps. He informed the Commission that he would not be able to attend the hearing as he was hospitalized. Both the CEO, Zilla Parishad, Jorhat and the PD, DRDA, Jorhat present. The Commission decided to hear them in view of the urgency of the case

Brief of the case
On 15.9.07 a petition was received by the Commission from Shri Satyaranjan Saikia of Teok in which he alleged that the cost for furnishing him information relating to the funds received from the Central and State Governments by the DRDA, Jorhat which was assessed as Rs. 1,50,000/- was an attempt on the part of the PIO of the office of the DRDA, Jorhat to deprive him of the information and was conspiratorial. He complained that the details of the cost were not furnished to him and the letter dated 27.8.07 informing him of the cost was furnished to him late.

The information sought for by him were as follows:

1. The details of the funds received from the Central Government and the State Government by the DRDA, Jorhat for the period 2000 to 2007 (upto June) be furnished.

2. The funds allotted to the Self-Help-Groups with the names of the groups, names of the Panchayats, the names of the Presidents / Secretaries of the works being undertaken by the groups for the period 2000-07 be furnished (upto June'07)

3. The dates on which trainings given and the nature of the training, the number of participants in these trainings and funds utilized for such trainings for the period 2000-07 be furnished.

4. Which persons and groups were given grants from the Government during the period 2000-07 and which works are they undertakings at present?

5. For the period 2000-07, which persons got self-employment benefits under Gramin Rojgar Yojana? Give details.

6. For the period 2000-07, how many Indira Awaj Yojana houses were constructed and what amount was spent? Names of the beneficiaries be given.

7. For the period 2000-07, what works were done under Hariwali Scheme and how much amount was spent? Give complete details.

Submission of the Public Authorities
The PD, DRDA, Jorhat submitted that as the SPIO of his office was on leave he could not attend the hearing today. He also submitted that the documents which were sought for by the complainant were available in the 8 (eight) Block Development Offices located in different parts of the district. However he had written to the Block Development Officers to compile the records required for furnishing information to the complainant. He admitted that there was delay in informing the complainant about the cost for furnishing information. But he submitted that it was only because the information were not available in his office and were available in the Block Development offices in the district. He further submitted that he would be able to furnish the information to the complainant pertaining to point Nos. 1, 2 (1st half), 4,6 and 7 within 15 days. But compilation of information regarding the second part of point 2 would take time. He prayed to the Commission for allowing him time to compile the information from the Block Development Offices. He further specifically pleaded that as the names of the beneficiaries under the SGRY were available in the form of muster rolls which were available only in the Block Development Offices and it would be difficult on his part to bring all these muster roles to his office centrally and as it would also be very difficult on his part as well as on the part of the Block Development Offices to make photocopies of these muster rolls as they were voluminous in nature, the Commission might be pleased to direct the complainant to take notes of the names of the beneficiaries from the Block Development Offices. He submitted that he had no infractural facilities to computerize the mater-rolls and it would also impede the safety of the records if they were moved from the block offices to his office.

Observation of the Commission
The Commission observed that there was delay in informing the complainant about the fees to be paid by him for getting the information from the office of the PD, DRDA, Jorhat. Also there was no cost analysis shown in the letter written to the complainant by the SPIO on 27.8.07. Hence the submission of the complainant that the analysis of the cost was not given to him was correct as seen from the records. However, the Commission found that the information sought for by the complainant was highly voluminous in nature and it would really be difficult on the part of the office of the PD, DRDA to collect these information within the time limit of 30 days. The Commission observed that the best course of action for the SPIO of PD, DRDA Office, Jorhat was to transfer the petition to 8 Block Development Offices of the district under section 6 (3) of the RTI Act, 2005 which the SPIO of the PD, DRDA did not do. The Commission also felt that the muster rolls available in the office of the Block Development Officers in the district could not be easily shifted and photocopied and it would be in the interest of public service and safety of records to allow the complainant to take notes of the names of the beneficiaries under the SGRY for the period from 2000-07. The Commission observed that the information should be furnished free of cost in view of the fact that there was delay in the entire matter.

Decision of the Commission
The Commission on careful consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case decided to direct the PD, DRDA, Jorhat as follows:

1. The PD, DRDA, Jorhat should furnish the information relating to point nos. 1,4, 6, 7 and 1st part of point 2 of the petition dated 26.07.07 of the complainant within 15 days of the receipt of this order free of charge.

2. The PD, DRDA, Jorhat should furnish information relating to point 3 and the second part of point 2 of the petition to the complainant within 60 days of the receipt of this order free of cost.

3. The PD, DRDA, Jorhat should direct the Block Development Officers of his district to keep ready the muster rolls under the SGRY in their respective offices so that the complainant had opportunity to take notes of the names of the beneficiaries in the offices of the Blocks. The notes so taken by the complainant should be certified by the BDO himself as true on proper verification. The entire exercise should be completed within 60 days.

The Commission refrained from imposing any penalty under section 20 of the RTI Act, 2005 on the SPIO on the plea of the PD, DRDA, Jorhat that the SPIO of his office was not properly acquainted with the various provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 and in view of the apology tendered by the PD on his behalf.

The Commission directed that the PD, DRDA, Jorhat should send the compliance report regarding point nos. 1,4,6,7 and 1st part point 2.

The Commission fixed 26.12.07 as the date for receipt of the report of compliance relating to point nos. 3, 5 and second part point 2.



Sd/- (Dr. B K Gohain)
State Information Commissioner, Assam
Janata Bhawan, Dispur.


Memo No SIC/JRT.2/2007 Dated October 23 , 2007

CC:
1. The Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Jorhat.
2. The Project Director, DRDA, Jorhat
3. Sri Saitya Ranjan Saiki a, Joint Secretary, Teok Press Club, Teok, Jorhat- 785112.
4. The DIPR, Dispur, Guwahati.
5. MD, AMTRON, Bamunimaidan.
6. Office file.


P.S. to State Information Commission, Assam
Janata Bhawan Dispur