PROCEEDINGS OF THE ASSAM INFORMATION COMMISSION

Case No. 265/2007

Dated 09-08-2007

Name of the Complainant:
Shri Prasanta Sekhar Deka, Advocate Gauhati High Court
4/Bye Lane No.5, New Sarania,Guwahati – 3

Name of the Public Authority /SPIO
Registrar Cooperative Societies, Assam

The following were present:
1. Shri J.I. Kathar, IAS, Registrar, Cooperative Societies
2. Shri H K Gayan, Dy. Registrar Cooperative Societies
3. Shri Prasanta Sekhar Deka

Brief of the case
Shri Prasanta Sekhar Deka, Advocate, Gauhati High Court submitted a complaint on 7.7.07 before the Chief Information Commissioner stating that he had. sent his clerk to the office of the Registrar, Cooperative Societies first on 16.6.07 and again on 18.6.07 to submit a petition under the RTI Act, 2005. On both the occasions the petition was not accepted on the ground that there was no SPIO or any notified officers to accept the RTI petition.

In the complaint Shri Deka made a personal reference that his clerk met Smt Juri Phukan, Additional Regis1rar of Cooperative Societies (Administration) as she was the senior most officer in the concerned office on 18.6.07 and gave the petition to her but she refused to accept the petition stating that it was not in the standard' format. She gave two photostat copies of a format to his clerk for submission of the petition

The information sought by him was:

1. Sub-division wise name and address of the Cooperative Societies where ad-hoc Managing Bodies are functioning in place of elected Managing Bodies, as required by the respective bye laws and / or statute, as on 10th June, 2007 including the nature of such ad-hoc bodies - whether it is one-man ad-hoc Managing Body under a Government officer or it is a Government made public ad-hoc Managing Body.

2. If such ad-hoc Managing Bodies exist, whether they are constituted and / or are approved by the Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Government of Assam indicating the dates of such order of approval? If any such proposal forwarded by the Registrar to Government and which is pending sanction, details be furnished.

The period to which the information sought: from 1st April, 2004 to 10th June, 2007

3. Information be furnished regarding period of office of such ad-hoc Managing Bodies of the respective Cooperative Societies indicating the date of last Annual General Meeting and reason for not holding election.

The period to which the information relates: from 1st April, 2004 to 10th June, 2007

4. Details of the action taken by the Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Assam to ensure compliance, both letter and spirit, of respective bye-laws as well as statutory laws governing functioning of such Cooperative Societies generally and specifically in terms of holding regular elections.

The period to which the information relates: from 1st April, 2004 to 10th June, 2007

Submission of the parties

The complainant submitted that there was absolutely no one in the office of the Registrar, Cooperative Societies to accept the petition or to guide the petitioner to enable him to submit the petition. The SPIO was not available on both 16th and 18th June 2007 and there was no indication anywhere in that office as to whom the petition on RTI Act would be submitted. The Additional Registrar, Cooperative Societies Smt Juri Phukan was the senior most officer in the office on 18.6.07 and when his clerk went there to submit his petition but she refused to accept it. She gave two photostat copies of the standard format and directed the clerk to submit the petition in the format.

The complainant also mentioned that in the format itself it was clearly written at the bottom that it was only a guideline and the request for information can be made in the plain paper under the RTI Act. He expressed surprise that a Senior officer in the Registrar of Cooperative Societies was not aware of the provision of the Act.

The Registrar, Cooperative Societies stated that he did not get the petition of the complainant in his office. It was only when the Commission issued him a notice for appearance which he received on 6.8.07 that he found that a copy of the application which was attached with the notice. He stated that he was not aware that the petitioner could not submit the petition in his office and regretted that it had happened in his office. The Registrar, Cooperative Societies requested for time to collect the information as he had received the petition only on 6.8.07.

The SPIO mentioned that he had been designated as SPIO only in July, 2007 and he did not know the incidence prior to that.

Observation of the Commission
The Commission expressed its unhappiness with the functioning of the office of the Registrar, Cooperative Societies in matters of implementation of the RTI Act 2005. The Registrar was reminded that in his earlier appearance before the Commission in another case he was asked to streamline the implementation of the RTI Act in his organization and to put up signboard prominently in the office showing the names of the SPIOs / ASPIOs and the names of the other officers to whom applications on RTI Act would be submitted and the mode of payment of application fees. These directions had not obviously been implemented by the Public Authority.

It was obviously a case of harassment of the petitioner who had, by deputing his clerk, tried to submit a petition seeking information from the Public Authority. The Commission would like to make it clear that in absence of the SPIO or the notified officers to receive the petition from the public under the RTI Act the Head of the office / Public authority would be deemed to be the SPIO with all the consequences.

Order of the Commission
The Commission made the following orders requiring the Registrar, Cooperative Societies under section 19 (8) (a) of the Act to :
(i) furnish the information to the complainant by 11.9.2007,
(ii) conduct enquiry why the petition was not accepted in his office on 16.6.07 and 18.6.07 and submit the enquiry report on the next date of hearing fixed pointing the responsibility for refusing to accept the petition,
(iii) make written statement at the time of next hearing why penalty under section 18(1) of the Act should not be imposed on the officers responsible for refusing to accept the application,
(iv) put up signboard in his office prominently showing the names of the SPIOs/ ASPIOs and other officers to whom the application under the RTI Act could be submitted along with mode of payment of the application fees,
(v) attend the next hearing along with the officers responsible for refusal of the application and the SPIO.

The Commission deferred the decision to impose penalty for failure to furnish information but made it clear that it would start from 12th September, 2007 if there was noncompliance with these orders. The case is posted for the final hearing on 11.9.07 at 11.30 AM. The Secretary of the Commission to issue notice to the parties concerned.


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


Authenticated true copy

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

Memo No SIC.288/2007/12 Dated August 9, 2007

CC:
1. The Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Assam.
2. The Dy. Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Assam
3. Shri Prasanta Sekhar Deka, Advocate, Gauhati High Court
4. The DIPR, Dispur, Guwahati.
5. MD, AMTRON, Bamunimaidan
6. Office file.


Secretary
State Information Commission, Assam