PROCEEDINGS OF THE ASSAM INFORMATION COMMISSION

Case No. 255/2007

Dated 04-08-2007

Name of the Complainant:
Shri Chunilal Bhattacharjee
Advocate, Dist. Bar Association
Satsang Ashram Road, Silchar
Cachar, Assam.

Name of the Public Authority /SPIO
Suptdng. Engrr. Irrigation Cachar Circle

The following were present:
1. Shri Harendra Nath Basumatary, C.E Irrigation, Assam, Chandmari
2. Shri Anil Ch. Singha, Superintending Engineer, Cachar Circle (Irri) Silchar
3. Shri Manash Ranjan Deb, Exe. Engr (T/C)
4. Shri Chunilal Bhattacharjee

The complainant present. The Chief Engineer, Irrigation, Assam, along with the Superintending Engineer, Cachar Circle (Irrigation) Silchar and the Executive Engineer (T/C) Cachar Circle present.

Brief of the case
Shri Chunilal Bhattacharjee of Silchar submitted a complaint on 13.6.07 before the Commission stating that he sought for information from the PIO of the office of the Superintending Engineer (Irrigation) Cachar Circle but he was not furnished copies of the documents nor was allowed him to inspect the documents. Hence this complaint case.

Submission of the parties
The complainant stated that he submitted one petition on 18.4. 07 seeking details of information regarding rejection of prayer for promotion to the post of UDA (Senior Assistant) by the Chief Engineer, Irrigation, Assam which was recommended by the Superintending Engineer concerned in respect of Shri Bidhu Bhushan Das, Junior Assistant. But he did not get any information.

Again on 27.10.06 he sought for details of information relating to files No. CCI/Estt/13/Pt.IV, No. CCI/Estt/156/Pt.I and the Guard file but he was not allowed to inspect the files.

On 30.10.07 he applied to the same authority for details of information relating to letter No. CCI/CON/68/2003/67 dated 10.6.03 regarding inter-se-seniority of Smt Kabita Bhattacharjee with reference to the letter dated 20.5.03 issued by Assistant Registrar (B), Gauhati High Court, Guwahati in view of the order passed in Civil Rule No 3275/1995.

On 10.1.07 he applied to the Superintending Engineer (Irri) Cachar Circle for inspection of file No CCI/CON/68. Again on 13.3.07 he applied for photocopies of the note sheet page nos. 43, 44 and 45 of file No. Estt/73 (Inspection). Again on 31.3.07 he applied for copies of the note sheet page Nos. 43,44,45 and 46 of file No. Estt/73.

On 9.10.06 he applied for information regarding notice dated 5.10.06 along with the objection filed by Smt Kabita Bhattacharjee on 5.10.06 and also backside of the notice with contents and signature obtained on 9.10.06.

On 23.5.07 he sought for copy of the note sheet page No. 10 of file No. CCI/ACS/64. On 5.8.06 he applied for information regarding the basis of circulars in respect of seniority in 1999 while promoting Sri Parimal Dutta and Majir Uddin Head Assistant vide letter No CA/Estt/156/Pt.1/7055 dated 23.2.95.

Again on 5.8.06 he wanted copy of the information relating to the letter issued by the Superintending Engineer on 28.7.06 to the Additional Chief Engineer, Zone -IV. On 12.3.07 he applied for information relating to the interview taken on 28.2.07 from amongst existing staff of Mechanical (Irrigation) Division and the information as to who were the members of the Selection Committee and whether it was Government approved and if so copy of the approval of the Government He also wanted list of persons interviewed with their performance.

On 7.2.07 he wanted copy of forwarding letter addressed to Hon'ble Gauhati High Court with date with reference to the Superintending Engineer's letter No CCI/Irri/567/497 dated 5.2.07.

The complainant stated that he also submitted an appeal to the Chief Engineer, Department of Irrigation, Assam, Guwahti in the matter of willful avoidance of allowing inspection of files. He confirmed that he received a reply from the Chief Engineer, Irrigation dated 9.3.07 in which he was informed that a writ has been filed by Smt Kabita Bhattacharjee and the information sought for is now at Gauhati High Court as reported by Superintending Engineer, Cachar.

He also acknowledged that he was in receipt of the letter dated .7.4. 07 from the Superintending Engineer (Irri) Cachar addressed to the Secretary, Irrigation Department in which it was stated that the post of head assistant in the office of Superintending Engineer (Irri) Cachar was filled up by one STP candidate Sri R. Barman as approved by the Irrigation Department and accordingly he was appointed as Head Assistant.

Regarding supply of information under the RTI Act 2005 it was communicated to him that the information was sub-judice in a court case and under police investigation or under the custody of the court and hence cannot be disclosed as per RTI Act 2005 under section 8(1) (h). He however stated that when he applied for information no court case was pending before the High Court.

The Complainant also acknowledged receipt of the reply to his petition dated 5.8.06 relating to the promotion of Sri Parimal Dutta as head assistant in Cachar Circle. He however remarked that the Superintending Engineer himself prepared a list of UDA cadre.

The Superintending Engineer (Irrigation) Cachar Circle submitted that in reply to the petition dated 18.4.07 the information was ready and available with him and he could handover the information to the complainant then and there. Regarding the application dated 28.10.06 he submitted that the files were the subject matter of the police investigation and as such they did not allow him to inspect the files under section 8(1) (h) of the RTI Act as he thought that the investigation might be impeded due to disclosures of the files to the complainant.

He also informed that files No. CCI/CON/68 and No, CCI/Estt/13/Pt-IV were sent to the Government Advocate of the Gauhati High Court in connection with the High Court cases pending as sought for by the complainant. The Chief Engineer informed the Commission that he had instructed the Superintending Engineer (Irri) Cachar Circle vide his letter dated 10.5.07 to ensure furnishing information to the applicants under the RTI Act on time to avoid penalty. He also had advised the Superintending Engineer (Irri) Cachar Circle to caution his office staff dealing with the RTI matter to be careful.

Observation of the Commission
The Commission after going through the records and after hearing the complainant and the Superintending Engineer (Irri) Cachar Circle as well as the SPIO of the office of the Superintending Engineer (Irri) Cachar Circle found that the SPIO did not furnish information due to incorrect interpretation of section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act. The information sought for by the complainant did not have any bearing on the process of investigation and apprehension or prosecution of offenses as these relate to service matters which cannot be taken as exemption from disclosures of information under section 8 of the Act.

The Commission found that in view of the multiplicity of information sought the SPIO as well as the Public Authority of the said office were not very definite as to what information were to be furnished to the complainant or which documents were to be allowed to be inspected by the complainant. The Commission was of the opinion that the files which had not been sent to the Government Advocate and were available in the office of the Superintending Engineer (Irri) Cachar Circle should be allowed to be taken copies of the required pages.

Decision of the Commission
The Commission on careful consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case decided to direct the SPIOI Public Authority of the office of Superintending Engineer (Irri) Cachar Circle to hand over the information relating to the submission dated 18.4.07 in respect of promotion of Sri Bidhu Bushan Das in presence of the Commission.

The Commission further directed the complainant to make out a list of the documents which are required by him from the office of the Superintending Engineer (Irri) Cachar Circle and send the same to the SPIO of the office of the Superintending. Engineer (Irri) Cachar Circle with a copy to the Commission. On receipt of this list from the complainant the SPIO of the said office should furnish him photocopies of the documents as sought for within 15 days of the receipt of the list from the complainant.

The Commission refrained from imposing any penalty on the SPIO of the office of the Superintending Engineer (Irri) Cachar Circle as the Commission found that there was no malafide intention in the misinterpretation of section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act and also there had been a lot of confusion due to multiple applications under the RTI Act submitted to the SPIO by the complainant on various dates.


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.278/2007/51 Dated August 4, 2007

CC:
1. The Chief Engineer, Irrigation, Assam, Guwahati
2. The Executive Engineer (T/C) Cachar Circle, Silchar.
3. The Superintending Engineer (Irri) Cachar Circle, Silchar
4. Shri Chunilal Bhattacharjee, Advocate Dist Bar Association, Satsang Asharam Road, Silchar, Cachar, Assam
5. The DIPR, Dispur
6. MD, AMTRON, Bamunimaidan
7. Office file.


Secretary
State Information Commission, Assam