Name of the Complainant:
Shri Ajoy Kumar Sarma,
President, All Assam Disabled Development Union,
Japorigog, Ganeshguri, Guwahati-5.

Name of the Public Authority:
Commissioner & Secretary,
Education(Higher) Deptt, Assam, Dispur.

The following were present:
1. Smti Bijoy Lakshmi Barua Gogoi
Deputy Secy., Higher Education Deptt - State Public Information Officer
2. Shri Delwar Hussain, SPIO, Directorate of Higher Education.
3. Shri Ajoy Kr. Sarma - Complainant
4. Shri Pradip Das
5. Shri Uttam Kr. Roy - Accompanying the Complainant

Brief of the case
On 10.5.07 the Commission while taking up the complaint of Shri Ajoy Kumar Sarma, President of All Assam Disabled Development Union, Guwahati found that the SPIO of the office of the Director, Higher Education did not furnish information to the complainant completely. Neither the Commissioner & Secretary, Higher Education or his SPIO nor the Director, Higher Education or his SPIO acted promptly on the petition of Shri Sarma who belongs to an under-privileged group.

The Directorate of Higher Education refused to receive the application fees in cash from the petitioner and asked him to deposit a new Bank Draft after Shri Sarma submitted a Bank Draft in favour of Director of Higher Education on some technical grounds. It spoke volumes about the insensitive attitude of the Directorate of Higher Education and the PIO towards a member of a public belonging to disabled section of the society which the Commission considered inexcusable.

On considering the facts and circumstances of the case, vide its order dated 10.5.07 the Commission directed the SPIO of Higher Education Department, Assam and the office of the Director of Higher Education to show cause as to why penalty should not be imposed on them at the rate of Rs. 250/per day up to a maximum of Rs. 25000/- each as contemplated under Section 20 (1) of the RTI Act, 2005. The Commission also decided to award compensation to the complainant under Section 19 (8)(b) of the RTI Act, 2005 for the harassment caused to the complainant by the office of the Directorate of Higher Education.

Accordingly, notices were issued to the SPIO of the office of Higher Education Department and office of the Director, Higher Education through Controlling Officers to show cause as to why penalty as proposed should not be confirmed for willful delay in furnishing the information. The Public Authorities namely the Commissioner & Secretary, Higher Education Department and the Director, Higher Education, Assam were asked to furnish affidavits under Section 19 (8)(a) of the RTI Act, 2005 on the measures taken by each of them on the petition of the complainant and action taken by them against persons responsible for delay. Hence this hearing.

Submission of the parties
The complainant submitted before the Commission that he was asked to deposit an application fee by way of Bank Draft to the Director, Higher Education, Assam vide his letter dated 10.8.06 when he wanted to pay the application fee in cash. When the Bank Draft of Rs. 10/- which he purchased from the Bank by paying Rs. 30/- as the bank charge was submitted to the Directorate, it was refused by the office of the Director on the ground that the name of the payee should have been SPIO of the Directorate of Higher Education, Assam and not Director, Higher Education. On the advice of the Director, Higher Education, Assam a new Bank Draft of Rs. 10/- in favour of the SPIO of his office as submitted by him thereby going to the office three times in addition to going to the Bank twice and paying Rs. 60/- as bank charge.

He submitted that the information was sent to him in four parts firstly on 30.8.06 giving him the jurisdictional position of the Directorate in respect the appointment of Gr.III and Gr- IV employ of the Colleges and Universities of Assam and next on 8.5.07 containing partial information regarding appointment of disabled persons in Gr.III and Gr.IV posts along with total strength of Gr.III and Gr-IV of provincialised Colleges of the Assam and thirdly on 23.5.07 giving another partial report of 33 provincialised Colleges including 3 Government Colleges and finally on 7.6.2007 containing the report of rest of the colleges and universities.

The complainant stated that he had great suspicion about the authenticity of the figures given in the reports relating to Gr.III & Gr.IV vacancies for disabled persons. He submitted that the 3% job reservation for disabled persons was authorised by an Act of the Parliament since 1996 and he wanted complete information about the vacancies of Gr.III and Gr. IV posts since 1995 for handicapped persons along with number of Gr.III and Gr.IV posts filled up with disabled persons. But the report was not complete in detail as it did not give clear picture of the vacancies reserved for the handicapped persons and the posts filled up with handicapped persons.

The SPIO of the Higher Education Department, Govt. of Assam submitted that the Department received the application of Shri Sarma seeking aforestated information on 25.7.06 from the State Information Commissioner and the application was sent to the Director, Higher Education along with enclosures instructing him to furnish the information to the petitioner after collecting necessary fees as per rules and requested the Director, Higher Education to intimate action taken in this, regard within 3 days. Thereafter, on 18.8. 06 another reminder was issued to the Director, Higher Education with a copy to the complainant. The SPIO stated that although she was designated as the State Public Information Officer vide notification dated 17.8.06 the matter was not brought to her notice and the matter was disposed of at the level of Under Secretary of the Department. The matter came to her knowledge after the Commission issued a notice dated 10.4.07 to her for her appearance. She sought for apology for any omission and commission which she might have committed unintentionally.

In the affidavit filed by the Commissioner and Secretary, Higher Education Department he narrated the steps taken by the SPIO of his office in transferring the petition of Shri Sarma the complainant to the Director of Higher Education and subsequently reminders were issued to the Director for furnishing information to the complainant.

At para 5 of the affidavit, however, the Commissioner and Secretary, Higher Education Department submitted that the complainant did not bring to the notice of the Commissioner and Secretary, Higher Education Department being the First Appellate Authority under the RTI Act that he had not received the complete information as sought for or that he had been harassed.

In the affidavit which was, however, not sworn before any Magistrate, the Director, Higher Education admitted that Shri Sarma came to his office and met then SPIO Shri Satish Ch. Sarma, Joint Director of Higher Education to deposit fees in cash when the SPIO expressed his inability to receive the fees in cash due to no availability of receipt book. The complainant was however requested by the then SPIO Shri Sarma to deposit the fees by way of Bank Draft in favour of the SPIO of the Directorate of Higher Education. He, however, stated that unfortunately there was a little mistake in the Bank Draft and the same was corrected subsequently and deposited to the then SPIO. He claimed that the question of harassment raised by the complainant before the Commission was not correct as the process of deposit of the Bank Draft was completed in cordial atmosphere and if the complainant felt harassed he could have approached the Director, Higher Education. The Director, further stated that he was unaware of the development. He further reiterated that the matter of harassment appears to be untrue.

Observation by the Commission
The affidavit of the Commissioner and Secretary, Higher Education Department contained statements that the complainant should have brought to the notice of the Commissioner and Secretary, Higher Education Department being the First Appellate Authority under the RTI Act that he had not received complete information as sought for or that he had been harassed. This is contrary to the provision of Section 18 of the RTI Act in which it has been clearly stated that, a citizen not getting information sought for within stipulated time of 30 days can approach the Commission with a complaint about the non-receipt of the information and the Commission can hear the complaint and take action as per the provisions of the RTI Act.

The Commission also found that non-receipt of the cash by the then SPIO on the plea of not having receipt book and rejection of the first. Bank Draft addressed to the Director, Higher Education were acts of harassment to a citizen belonging to an under privileged group of people. The SPIO of the Directorate of Higher Education as well as the Director of the Higher Education showed extreme insensitiveness towards a member of an under privileged group belonging to physically disabled group. In fact the refusal on the part of the SPIO of the Directorate of Higher Education to receive application fees in cash from a disabled person and rejecting the first Bank Draft purely on the ground that the same was not addressed to the SPIO but addressed to the Director of Higher Education were acts of harassment. As such the Commission could not ignore these acts of harassment to this disabled person. As the Director, Higher Education was not present personally to explain his conduct before the Commission and as the present SPIO Shri Delwar Hussain was not the officer who refused to receive the cash or the first Bank Draft, the Commission considered it expedient and necessary to give another chance to the Director, Higher Education to submit a fresh affidavit on the points raised by the complainant.

Decision of the Commission
The Commission, therefore decided to direct the Director, Higher Education, Assam to submit a fresh affidavit on the matter of harassment to Shri Ajoy Kr. Sarma, President, All Assam Disabled Development Union for consideration of the Commission within 15 days of the date of this order. The Commission shall pass necessary orders regarding imposition of penalty' and payment of compensation after perusal of the affidavit to be submitted by the Director, Higher Education.

The next date is fixed on 25.7.2007.

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. The Commissioner & Secretary, Education (Higher) Department, Assam, Dispur, Guwahati.
2. Smti Bijoy Lakshmi Barua Gogoi, Deputy Secretary, Higher Education Deptt., Assam, Dispur.
3. The Director, Higher Education, Assam, Kahilipara, Guwahati.
4. Shri Delwar Hussain, State Public Information Officer, Directorate of Higher Education Assam, Kahilipara, Guwahati
5. Shri Ajoy Kumar Sarma, President, All Assam Disabled Development Union, Japorigog, Ganeshguri, Guwahati-5.
6. Director, Information & Public Relations, Dispur, Guwahati
7. MD, AMTRON, Bamunimaidan
6. Office file.


Secretary
State Information Commission, Assam