Dated 18-09-2007

Name of the Complainant:
Shri Dilip Pegu President, M.A.D.C.,
S/o. Sri Bilash Pegu,
Vill – Karpumpuli Gaon,
P.O Gogamukh, Dhemaji.

Name of the Public Authority:
Principal Secy, MAC

The following were present:
1. Shri Gurga Ram Pegu Principal Secy, Public Authority Mising Autonomous Council
2. Shri Deba Ram Doley, SPIO, Dy. Secy (F) MAC
3. Shri Dilip Pegu
4. Shri Jiban Kuli

The Commission found that this case was dealt with in file relating to the earlier complaint of the complainant. But on perusal of the records, it transpired that the information sought for in this case was not the same as in the earlier case (AIC.77/2006) and this case should be treated as a separate case and be renumbered. Hence the case was renumbered as AIC Case No. DMJ.1/2007.

Brief of the case
On 23.7.07, Shri Dilip Pugu of Gogamukh submitted a petition before the Chief Information Commissioner stating that he did not receive information from the Principal Secretary, Mising Autonomous Council and prayed that the Commission should interfere and ensure furnishing of information to him. He, however, made a mention to the earlier case stating that he could not get further clarification on the problem of depositing the cost amounting to Rs. 32,788/- as fixed by the MAC.

The Commission, disposed of his earlier complaint vide its order dated 5.1.07 in connection with his complaint dated 15.9.06 and the MAC had sent copies of the documents furnished to the complainant free of cost to the Commission also. Hence this issue of the cost in the earlier case was not taken into consideration. However, the complainant was advised that he might meet the Principal Secretary, MAC for clarification on the case.

In the present case the complainant wanted the following information vide his petition dated 23.7.07.

1. The fund (expenditure / Bank balance etc.) position of MAC Pass Book at UBI Mingnang (Gogamukh)branch for the year 2005-2006 and 2006-2007.

2. AOP and all the schemes (implementation /utilization / payment records etc.) for the year 2006-2007.

3. The list of beneficiaries of grants in aid / inputs of various departments with statements / bills/ drawing/ payment records etc for the year 2005-2006 and 2006-2007.

4. the list of construction committees with the name of President / Secretary / Nayak etc. approved by MAC and Statement/ Bill payment drawn records of the same also for the year 2005-2006 and 2006-2007.

5. Completion reports/ completion certificates from Technical Cell (TC) and from concerned agency against each scheme of each department implemented under MAC and Drawing / Payment / disbursement certificates and others relevant from Account branch against the each scheme of each department of MAC for the year 2005-2006 and 2006-2007. All the documents sought to be approved by the PS, MAC.

6. All the records of the caveat order / interim order / judgement / verdict etc. of the Hon’ble Gauhati High Court for the year 2005-2006 and 2006-2007 related MAC affairs

7. All the list of Interim Political Body / list of the E.M / list of the G.M Constituted by the Government of Assam from the year 1995 to 2007.

Submission of the parties
The complainant submitted that all the documents were available in the office of MAC. He admitted that he did not give any petition to the MAC and submitted the complaint directly to the Commission.

The Principal Secretary, MAC stated that he did not get any petition from the complainant Shri Pegu on the matter. He came to know about it only when he received the notice issued by the Commission on 12/9/07. However, on receipt of the notice of the Commission, he directed the Deputy Secretary, Finance of the Council to locate the documents.

The Deputy Secretary, Finance, MAC submitted that the documents sought for were numerous and some of the documents were to be collected from the field. Hence it would take time in collecting those documents and for furnishing copies. He submitted that the bank account statement as wanted at point 1 of the petition could be collected from the Bank and given as well as the information relating to point 2 could also be given without delay. The lists of Construction Committees with names of Presidents etc. which is the first part of information sought in para 4 could be given within one month, but the 2nd part of the information in that part were related to point 5 in the petition and these would have to be collected from field offices and compiled . So 90 days time would be required for it. Likewise the information on point 3 of the petition would have to be compiled and would take considerable time as many records were involved and were to be compiled. He submitted that at least 45 days would be required to furnish the same. He stated that he would furnish the information relating to points 6 & 7 of the petition within 30 days from the date of this hearing. He reported that the MAC was running with only 2 officers and one UDA and 2 LDAs as the regular staff and the fixed pay employees were not well versed in the office works and he would have to compile himself the records in his office besides collecting from the field.

Observation of the Commission
(i) The Commission found that the complainant did not submit any petition for information to the Principal Secretary, Missing Autonomous Council or to the SPIO of the Council. He submitted the complaint directly to the Commission on 23.7.07 and the MAC authorities came to learn about the petition only after receiving the notice issued by the Commission dated 4.9.07 as a copy of the petition was enclosed with the notice. Hence the Commission did not find fault with the public authority for failure to furnish information on time.

(ii) The complainant is now familiar with the RTI Act matters as he had already submitted petitions under the Act earlier also and made appearances before the Commission in connection with them. He should submit his request for information to the SPIO or the public authority concerned and not to come to the Commission directly. In this case the complainant has mixed up his request with the case No. 77/2006 which had been decided by the Commission earlier. As he had requested for information on 7 new matters now it had to be treated as a new petition for information.

Decision of the Commission
The Commission on a careful consideration of all facts and circumstances of the case and on hearing the Principal Secretary, MAC and the Deputy Secretary, Finance, MAC as well as the complainant decided to issue the following directions:

(i) Information on items 1, 2, 6 and 7 which did not involve collection thereof from the field officers and were available in the office of the MAC should be compiled item-wise and year-wise as wanted by the complainant and he should be intimated in writing the cost of photocopying the pages. On realization of the cost thereof the information should be furnished to the petitioner within one month from the date of this hearing.

(ii) Information on point 3 which required collection / compilation from the field officers and are not readily available in the MAC office would be compiled separately for the years 2005-06 and 2006-07 and the petitioner informed the cost of photocopying of the pages thereof. On realization of the cost of photocopying the information should be furnished to the petitioner within a period of 45 days from the date of this hearing.

(iii) Information relating to the 1st part of point No. 4 viz. constitution of the committee with names of President, Secretary, Nayak etc approved by the MAC as requested in item 4 will be likewise furnished to the petitioner year-wise within 30 days from the date of hearing on realization of the cost of photocopying.

(iv) The second part of information wanted by the petitioner in point No. 4 relating to the statement / bill / payment / their records for the years 2005-06 and 2006-07 be clubbed with item 5 in the petition. Information sought therein required collection from the field officers and compilation which would be time consuming and voluminous. The Principal Secretary, MAC and the SPIO, MAC requested for 90 days time to collect the information under. The petitioner on the other hand submitted before the Commission that the entire information was available in the MAC office. The Commission found that collection of information and compilation thereof would require time and directed the Principal Secretary, MAC and the SPIO, MAC to collect and compile the information and intimate the petitioner the cost of photocopying of the pages file wise separately for the years 2005-06 and 2006-07. On realization of the cost thereof information should be furnished within 90 days from the date of this hearing.

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. Shri Garga Ram Pegu, Principal Secretary, Mising Autonomous Council, P.O. Gogamukh, Dist- Dhemaji, Assam
2. Shri Deba Ram Doley, Deputy Secretary, Finance, Mising Autonomous Council, P.O. Gogamukh, Dist- Dhemaji, Assam
3. Shri Dilip Pegu, President, Mising Autonomy Demand Committee, Dhemaji
4. The DIPR, Dispur, Assam
5. MD, AMTRON, Bamunimaidan.
6. Office file.


Secretary
State Information Commission, Assam