PROCEEDINGS OF THE ASSAM INFORMATION COMMISSION FULL COMMISSION

Case No. 131/2007

Dated 20.6.2007

Name of the Complainant:
Sri Zakir Hussain
Dy. Director of Training
Directorate of Employment & Craftsmen Training, Assam Rehabari, Ghy - 8

Name of the Public Authority:
Labour & Employment Department

The following were present
1. Shri K.K. Mittal, IAS
Commissioner & Secretary Labour & Employment Dept!
2. Shri P.P. Barooah
Jt. Secy, Labour & Employment
3. Sri Zakir Hussain
The appellant Shri Zakir Hussain present. Shri K.K. Mittal, lAS, Commissioner & Secretary to the Government of Assam, Labour & Employment Department who is the First Appellate Authority along with Sri P.P. Barooah, Joint Secretary, Labour & Employment who is the SPIO of the department present.

Brief of the case
The appellant Shri Zakir Hussain-, Deputy Director, Directorate of Employment & Craftsmen Training, Assam, Guwahti submitted an appeal on 27.4.07 stating that he submitted an application under the RTI Act to the Public Information Officer, Labour & Employment Department, Government of Assam on 21.8.06. He received information from the SPIO vide his letter dated 18.9.2006 which were found to 'be misleading, incomplete and incorrect. Then he submitted his first appeal to the Commissioner & Secretary to the Government of Assam, Labour & Employment Department on 16.10.06 along with two reminders on 24.11.06 and 28.3.07. Thereupon he received reply from the 1st Appellate Authority on 10.4.07. The appellant stated that he was not satisfied with the reply furnished by the 1 st Appellate Authority as instead of supplying documents to him he was asked by the 1 st Appellate Authority to inspect the documents. Hence he had submitted this 2nd appeal under the RTI Act.

The appellant furnished with his appeal, a copy of his application'under the RTI Act dated 19.8.06 addressed to the SPIO, Labour & Employment Department and the reply received from the SPIO, Labour & Employment Department, a copy of his appeal petition addressed to the Commissioner & Secretary to the Government of Assam, Labour & Employment Department, two reminders addressed to the Commissioner & Secretary to the Govern~ent of Assam, Labour & Employment Department and a copy ofthe reply of the 1st Appellate Authority, Labour & Employment Department.

Submission of the parties
Shri K.K. Mittal, lAS, Commissioner & Secretary to the Government of Assam , Labour & Employment Department who is also the 1st Appellate Authority stated the SPIO of his department informed the complainant that furnishing copies of file notings was not within the ambit of the RTI Act, 2005 The appellant was however advised to approach the Appellate Authority in this regard. He further stated that as Sri Hussain was a departmental officer, he considered his appeal sympathetically and he gave in writing to him that as he (Sri Hussain) wanted to see the documents he could do so during the office hours during the next 7 days. He submitted before the Commission that the then SPIO furnished point to point information to the complainant in response to his application under the RTI Act.

The complainant, Sri Hussain stated that the information furnished to him in response to his letter dated 19.8.06 by the then SPIO, Labour & Employment Department was not satisfactory. He wanted the daily progress made on his application and on the High Court Order dated 29.3.06, the names and designation of the officers who were supposed to take action on his application and wanted to know from the SPIO as to what action were taken against these officers for not doing work and causing harassment to him. He also wanted to know from the SPIO why he was not promoted to the post of Joint Director for which he was eligible. He further wanted the copies of the file notings with respect to the departmental proceeding drawn against him by the department. He also asked to SPIO to provide him the copies of the earlier daily proceedings recorded by the Inquiry Officer. He however, informed the Commission that he got copies of the daily proceedings recorded by the Inquiry Officers but these copies wer~ not the same as recorded by the Inquiry Officer. He wanted the copies of the notings in the file relating to his departmental proceeding which were not given to him.

The SPIO informed that Sri Hussain was not eligible for promotion to the post of Joint Director yet and no officer junior to him was promoted to the post of Joint Director.The Commissioner & Secretary, Labour & Employment informed the Commission that the copies of the daily proceedings recorded by the Inquiry Officer were furnished to the appellant by the then SPIO and these copies did not carry his signature as according to the Inquiry Officer he refused to put his signature on the daily proceedings. The Commissioner & Secretary, Labour & Employment Department however, made it very clear that the appellant would be allowed to inspect any document including file notings relating to the departmental proceedings and the appellant can take copies of the doctlments / notings of the file.

Observation of the Commission
The Commission observed that the appellant was going in a round about way in making requests for information. Many of the informations which he wanted were already available with him and the department had no objection to make any document available to him. In so far as notings on the file were concerned the Commission made it clear that being an independent statutory authority it is competent to interpret the Act without being influenced by the direction of the Ministry of Personnel, Government of India or any other authorities. Though the Central Information Commission has already held that the file includes its note sheets also and together they constitute records under section 2 (i) of the RTI Act, 2005, the Assam Information Commission had not taken any decision on this so far. As the issue has been raised in this appeal the Assam Information Commission holds the similar view that the note sheets are part of the file liable to be treated as information under section 2 (f) ofthe RTI Act, 2005.

Decision of the Commission
The Commission on hearing both the parties decided:
(i) The appellant should submit a list of documents required by him to the SPIO.
(ii) He will also submit a list of files that he wants to examine along with the note sheets
(iii) On receipt of such lists the SPIO will make available the documents and allow inspection of the files including the note sheets and enable the appellant to take copies / furnish certified copies to him
(iv) This exercise should be completed within one month from the date of this order.

The appeal is allowed to this extent.
The Secretary of the Commission will forward a copy of this judgement to the Chief Secretary of the Government of Assam and the Commissioner & Secretary, AR & T Department for guidance of the Public Authorities in the State.

Sd/- (R.S. Mooshahary)
Chief Information Commissioner, Assam
Janata Bhawan, Dispur.


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


Authenticated true copy

(Jiauddin Ahmed)
Secretary, State Information Commission, Assam
Janata Bhawan, Dispur.

Memo No SIC. 39/2007/22 Dated June 22, 2007

CC:
1. The Commissioner & Secretary to the Government of Assam, Labour & Employment Department.
2. Sri P.P. Barooah, Joint Secretary, Labour & Employment & SPIO.
3. Sri Zakir Hussain Dy. Director of Training Directorate of Employment & Craftsmen Training, Assam Rehabari, Ghy - 8
4. MD, AMTRON, Bamunimaidan for website uploading
5. The Director, Information & Public Relation, Dispur.
6. Office file.


Secretary
State Information Commission, Assam