Dated 26-09-2007

Name of the Complainant:
Sri Nirupam Banerjee
Ramkrishna Sarani, Sonai Road
Silchar, Cachar

Name of the Public Authority:
CEO, Cachar Zilla Parishad

The following were present:
1. Smt. Sadhana Hojai CEO, Cachar Zilla Parishad
2. A.J. Laskar, APO (T) Cachar Zilla Parishad
3. Shri Nirupam Banerjee

Brief of the case
On 25.6.07, a petition was received from Sri Nirupam Banerjee, Silchar in which he alleged that the office of the Chief Executive Officer, Cachar Zilla Parishad tried to avoid furnishing information sought for by him relating to various on going and completed schemes by demanding more than Rs. 5000/- for photocopy charge of the records, while according to the RTI Act information should be provided in diskette on floppy at the rate of Rs. 50/- per diskette / floppy and there was also provision of inspection of records. On receipt of this petition the Secretary of the Commission transferred the same to the Chief Executive Officer, Cachar Zilla Parishad under section 6(3) of the RTI Act 2005 requesting him to furnish the information to the petitioner.

On 17.7.07 another petition was received from Shri Nirupam Banerjee of Silchar in which he stated that he faced unnecessary harassment when he approached the APO (Tech) of Zilla Parishad, Cachar as he did not provide him with the information sought for by him vide his letter dated 16.5.07 within the specified time limit. He enclosed copies of the letter of the Asstt PIO of Cachar Zilla Parishad and of the PIO. But he informed that he did not get any response to his letter. The Secretary of the Commission wrote to the CEO, an advisory, on a reference from that public authority on 10.8.07, advising him to communicate to the petitioner the full calculation of the amount to be deposited by the petitioner.

The information sought for by the petitioner were as follows:

(1) The total amount of funds (cash and Rice) received by Zilla Parishad Cachar from Government of India, Govt. of Assam, DRDA Cachar etc. under various Programmes like SGRY/SGSY/SHG/IAY/MLA Area Development fund / MP Area Development fund/NFBC / Health Care / Old age pension /EFC / Backward Class Development fund / IBS/FDR/Mosquito Net etc. in detail (date wise / programme wise) in the year 2001-2002 to 2006-2007.

(2) The Action Plan / List sanctioned schemes / list of beneficiaries under various programmes / projects like SGRY / SGSY / SHG / IAY / MLA area Development fund / MP Area Development fund / NFBC / Health care / Old age pension / EFC / Backward class development fund / IBS / FDR/ Mosquito Net etc. in detail (date wise / programme wise) in the year 2001-2002 to 2006-2007

(3) The total amount of funds (Cash and Rice) directly Executed / Utilised by Zilla Parishad Cachar in the year 2001-2002 to 2006-2007 under various Programmes (SGRY/SGSY/SHG/IAY/MLA Area Development fund / MP Area Development fund / NFBC / Health Care / Old age pension /EFC / Backward Class Development fund / IBS/FDR/Mosquito Net etc.) & schemes showing the (a) Name of the Programme (b) Name & Location of the schemes / Name and address of the beneficiaries (c) Sanctioned amount (d) Paid amount (cash and rice ) (e) Balance amount (cash and rice) (f) Physical progress of work in percentage (g) Date of starting the work (h) Date of completion (i) Date of Labour payment (j) Name of the Executing officer (k) Remarks (if any)

(4) The total amount of funds (cash and Rice) allotted / released to the Gaon Panchayats under Zilla Parishad Cachar under various Programmes like SGRY/SGSY/SHG/IAY/MLA Area Development fund / MP Area Development fund / NFBC / Health Care / Old age pension /EFC / Backward Class Development fund / IBS/FDR/Mosquito Net etc. in detail (date wise / programme wise) in the year 2001-2002 to 2006-2007 & schemes showing the (a) Name of the Programme (b) Name & Location of the schemes / Name and address of the beneficiaries ( c) Sanctioned amount (d) Paid amount (cash and rice ) (e) Balance amount (cash and rice) (f) Physical progress of work in percentage (g) Date of starting the work (h) Date of completion (i) Date of Labour payment (j) Name of the Executing officer (k) Remarks (if any)

Submission of the parties
The complainant submitted before the Commission that he sought for information about the various on-going and completed schemes of the Government relating to SGRY/EFC etc on 16.5.07 which was duly received by an assistant in the office and he got its acknowledgement. He received a letter dated 24.5.07 from the APIO of the office the Cachar Zilla Parishad informing him that the Zilla Parishad deals with only SGRY and EFC schemes and for the other schemes like IAY, PMGY, SHG, EAS, JGSY he should approach the concerned departments. Then on 26.6.07 he received a letter from the SPIO informing him that he was to deposit Rs. 13,000/- as cost for the information. He then wrote to the Secretary of the Assam Information Commission requesting him to take steps against the Zilla Parishad as they demanded excessive amount of fees instead of giving the information in diskette / floppy which cost only Rs. 50/- per diskette / floppy providing him the opportunity to inspect the documents. While the SPIO wanted him to attend the office of Zilla Parishad on 14.6.07 but there was no officer or assistant present when he went there. He submitted that as the SPIO of Cachar ZP failed to furnish him information in time, the information should be furnished to him free of charge.

The CEO, Zilla Parishad submitted that the application of the complainant dated 16.5.07 was received by her office on 24.5.07. The SPIO of her office wrote to the complainant on the same day. She denied that the letter was received on 16.5.07. She submitted that the SPIO sent a letter to the complainant on 26.6.07 informing him the cost. As the information was not wholly available in her office and had to be collected form the Block Development Offices and Gaon Panchayats it took time to assess the cost and hence there was delay in intimating it. As the complainant did not deposit the cost, the SPIO could not furnish the information although information was collected by him.

The complainant submitted that he did submit his first application on 16.5.07 and got a receipt from the office. He showed the seal of the office of the Zilla Parishad with the signature and the date. He submitted that as per the RTI Act 2005, it was the duty and responsibility of the SPIO to collect the information from the concerned offices and furnish the same within 30 days.

The CEO, Zilla Parishad submitted that as the application of the complainant was not accompanied by the application fee of Rs. 10/- it was liable to be rejected. However, she did not do that but informed the petitioner the availability of information in her office. But the number of documents involved was huge and the period was for six years i.e. from 2001-02 to 2006-07 and it was not possible to collect all the information and give the same to him within 30 days. Even now, the muster-rolls of the schemes were in the block offices and G.P. offices. She however, submitted that she asked the SPIO to collect information relating to IAY / SGSY/SHG also while MLA area development fund / NFBC / Health care / old age pension / backward class dev. Scheme / FDR/ Mosquito net were not related to the Z.P. She also did not have the means to give the information in electronic form and as such the complainant was requested to deposit the amount for photocopying the documents.

Observation of the Commission
The Commission saw the records brought by the SPIO which were required to be photocopied. Also the Commission found that the number of documents involved was quite numerous and as the Z.P. did not have the facilities for electronic recording, it was not be possible to provide the information in electronic form. The Commission referred to Section 7 (9) of the Act which reads as follows:

"An information shall ordinarily be provided in the form in which it is sought unless it would disproportionately divert the resources of the public authority or would be detrimental to the safety or preservation of the record in question."

The best way to sort out this problem was for the Public Authority to give the complainant the opportunity to inspect for himself the documents which he sought for from the Public Authority so that he could see the magnitude of the cost involved. The Public Authority should also give him the opportunity to decide how many documents he wanted to get photocopied and how many he could see and take notes after inspection. The complainant himself in his petition dated 21.6.07 addressed to the Secretary of the Commission sought for inspection of records. The complainant however, insisted in that letter that the information should be in electronic form. The Commission, was, of the view that some of the information sought for by the complainant should be furnished in the form of photocopies on payment of cost on inspection and the other information should be taken note of by the complainant to be duly certified by the SPIO to be correct.

The Commission found that the delay in communicating the cost was not without basis and the ASPIO responded to the complainant on 24.5.07 to his first petition. The Commission did not find that there was any deliberate attempt to deny information on the part of the SPIO and the time taken in informing him of the cost was justified.

Decision of the Commission
On careful consideration of the facts and circumstances of case and on hearing of the Public Authority, SPIO and the complainant the Commission decided to direct under section 19 (8) (a) of the RTI Act, 2005 :

(a) Public Authority and the SPIO of Cachar Zilla Parishad, Silchar would allow the complainant to inspect the collected documents in the office of the CEO, Cachar Zilla Parishad and the inspection should take place from 8th to 15th October, 2007 (excluding holidays) from 11.00 AM to 4.00 PM in presence of the SPIO. The complainant after inspection of the documents might take notes of the documents and it should be certified by the SPIO.

(b) The Public Authority would also allow the complainant to take photocopies of the documents which he would select. The relevant documents which were not available in the office of the Cachar Zilla Parishad but available in different offices of the district under the control of CEO, Zilla Parishad might be allowed for inspection by the complainant for which the CEO, Zilla Parishad may issue suitable instructions.

(c) The CEO, Zilla Parishad should hold an enquiry on which date the petition of the complainant dated 16.5.07 was received and by whom. She should fix the responsibility on the person who allegedly received the petition on 16.5.07 and deal with the culprit departmentally.

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.

CC:
1.Smt. Sadhana Hojai, CEO, Cachar Zilla Parishad, Silchar
2. Shri A.J. Laskar, APO (T), Cachar Zilla Parishad, Silchar
3. Shri Nirupam Banerjee, Ramkrishna Sarani, Sonai Road, Silchar - 788006, Cachar.
4. The DIPR, Dispur, Assam
5. MD, AMTRON, Bamunimaidan.
6. Office file.


Secretary
State Information Commission, Assam