State information commission, punjab

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB

SCO No. 32-33-34, Sector -17-C, CHANDIGARH
Sh. Guru Datt Pathak,

Gen. Secy, Shashtri Young, Society,

(Regd) H.No. B IV, 51543,

Mohalla Mishra, Barnala.

……………………….Complainant
Vs.

Public Information Officer

O/o Commissioner,

Municipal Corporation,

Ludhiana.

……………………..Respondent

CC No.1322 of 2007
Present: (i) Sh. Guru Datt Pathak, Complainant

(ii) Smt. Promila Vij, Superintendent-cum-APIO on behalf of the Respondent.

ORDER

Heard
2. Complainant states that he has been provided copies of the TS-1 forms regarding 8 buildings in the area of Daressi ground, Ludhiana and requested that rent deeds/sale deeds in relation to these buildings should also be provided. Respondent is directed to` supply the copies of the sale deeds of the properties for which TS-1 has been provided to the Complainant within 10 days. As the Complainant has not demanded the lease deeds in his original application, he may file a separate application for getting lease deeds. In case the Complainant is not provided with the sale deeds within 10 days as directed, he is free to approach the Commission in this regard.

3. Disposed of. Copies of the order be sent to the parties.


Sd/-

(Kulbir Singh)

State Information Commissioner

Dated 20^th February, 2008

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB

SCO No. 32-33-34, Sector -17-C, CHANDIGARH
Sh. Samarjit Singh,

S/o Sh. Rampal,

R/o, Vill – Dhauala,

Teh. Tapa, Distt- Barnala.

…………………………….Complainant
Vs.

Public Information Officer

O/o B.D.O.P,

Barnala.
……………………………..Respondent

CC No. 1690 of 2007
Present: (i) None is present on behalf of the Complainant

(ii) Sh. Harnal Singh, Panchayat Secretary, BDPO. Barnala on behalf of the Respondent

ORDER

Heard
2. Respondent states that as directed during the last hearing, he has sent the information by registered post but the same has been returned by the postal authorities with the endorsement that the Complainant has refused to accept the same. Complainant is not present today. He was also absent on the last date of hearing.

3. The complaint is dismissed for non prosecution. Copies of the order be sent to the parties

Sd/-

(Kulbir Singh)

State Information Commissioner

Dated 20^th February, 2008

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB

SCO No. 32-33-34, Sector -17-C, CHANDIGARH
Sh. Gurbaksh Singh,

# 80, Premier Complex,

Chandigah Road,

Ludhiana.

…………………………….Complainant
Vs.

Public Information Officer

O/o Distt. Transport Officer,

Moga

……………………………..Respondent

CC No. 1529 of 2007

Alongwith

CC No. 1530 of 2007
Present: (i) Sh. Gurbaksh Singh, Complainant.

(ii) None is present on behalf of the Respondent.

ORDER

Heard.
2. Complainant states that the information supplied to him till date is not complete as per his demand dated 30.06.07. The Respondent is not present. There is, thus, no rebuttal to the averment made by the Complainant regarding the non supply of complete information.

3. I, therefore, direct the Respondent to supply the complete information to the Complainant before the next date of hearing. The Respondent is also directed to appear personally or through a suitably authorized representative before the Commission on the next date of hearing failing which appropriate proceedings shall be taken against the Respondent in absentia.

3. Adjourned to 19.03.08 (10.30 AM) for further proceedings. Copies of the order be sent to the parties.

Sd/-

(Kulbir Singh)

State Information Commissioner

Dated: 20^th February, 2008

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB

SCO No. 32-33-34, Sector -17-C, CHANDIGARH
Sh. Gian Deep Singh,

S/o Sh. Kuldeep Singh,

# 10, V.P.O. Lalru,

The. Dera Bassi, Distt. Mohali.

…………………………….Complainant
Vs.

Public Information Officer

O/o Secretary,

Zila Parishad,

Patiala.
……………………………..Respondent
CC No. 1569 of 2007
Present: (I) Sh. Gian Deep Singh, Complainant.

(ii) Sh. Maninder Pal Singh, Sr. Assistant on behalf of the Respondent

ORDER

Heard
2. Complainant states that he has not been provided with the correct information against item no. 12 of his application. According to him, the Respondent has supplied misleading information that many candidates have identical names and that the Respondent had asked him to supply the receipt number or their place of postings for giving complete information. Complainant has supplied the same to the Respondent today in the Commission. The Respondent is directed to give the information to the Complainant by Registered post latest by 5^th March 2008.

3. Adjourned to 11.03.08 (10.30 AM) for further proceedings. Copies of the order be sent to the parties.

Sd/-

(Kulbir Singh)

State Information Commissioner

Dated: 20^th February, 2008

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB

SCO No. 32-33-34, Sector -17-C, CHANDIGARH
Sh. Balvir Singh,

S/o Sh. Gurnam Singh,

Vill Bir Khaurd,

P.O Hamirgarh Dhaipai,

Teh, & Distt. Mansa
…………………………….Complainant
Vs.

Public Information Officer

O/o D.P.I (Secondary),

SCO- 95-97, Sec-17/D,

Chandigarh.
……………………………..Respondent
CC No. 1470 of 2007
Present: (i) Sh. Balvir Singh, Complainant

(ii) Sh. Avtar Singh, Sr. Assistant on behalf of the Respondent

ORDER

Heard
2. Complainant states that he has received the required information and he is satisfied.

3. Disposed of. Copies of the order be sent to the parties

Sd/-

(Kulbir Singh)

State Information Commissioner

Dated: 20^th February, 2008

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB

SCO No. 32-33-34, Sector -17-C, CHANDIGARH

Sh. Ramesh Adya,

# 983, Phallan Adya,

Ludhiana.

…………………………….Complainant
Vs.

Public Information Officer

O/o Commissioner,

Municipal Corporation,

Ludhiana.
……………………………..Respondent
CC No. 1331 of 2007

Present: (i) None is present on behalf of the Complainant.

(ii) Smt. Promila Vij Superintendent-cum-APIO on behalf of the Respondent.

ORDER

Heard.
2. The Complainant has sent an application that he is not well and, therefore, he can not attend the hearing today. He has requested for another date. He has intimated that the Respondent has not submitted the correct reply to item No. 3 of his application. The Respondent states that vide his letter No. 448/PIO/RTI/D dated 6.12.07, he has asked the Complainant to meet the Executive Engineer, Zone-A, Sh. P. K. Chadha on any working day to get the information. Respondent is directed to supply the information to the Complainant before the next date of hearing and in case the information is not supplied, Sh. P. K .Chadha, Executive Engineer along with the PIO should personally appear on the next date of hearing.

3. Adjourned to 19.03.08 (10.30 AM) for further proceedings. Copies of the order be sent to the parties.
Sd/-

(Kulbir Singh)

State Information Commissioner

Dated: 20^th February, 2008

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB

SCO No. 32-33-34, Sector -17-C, CHANDIGARH
Sh. Devinder Singh,

S/o Sh. Harbans Singh,

R/o Vill Daowala, P.O-Old Shala,

Tehsil & Distt- Gurdaspur.

…………………………….Complainant
Vs.

Public Information Officer

O/o Deputy Commissioner,

Gurdaspur.

……………………………..Respondent
CC No. 1324 of 2007
Present: (i) Sh. Devinder Singh, Complainant

(ii) Sh. Gurmukh Singh, Asst. on behalf of the Respondent

ORDER
Heard.
2. The Complainant states that he has received the information and he is satisfied therewith. He has, however, prayed that the Respondent be penalized for the delay in supplying the information. He states that he made the application for information on 12.03.07 and that it has taken the Respondent approximately a year for supplying the information.

3. Regarding the delay in providing the information, the PIO is directed to show cause on the next date of hearing why action should not be taken against him under Section 20 of the RTI Act, 2005 for not providing the information in time.

4. Adjourned to 19.03.08 (10.30 AM) for further proceedings. Copies of the order be sent to the parties.

Sd/-

(Kulbir Singh)

State Information Commissioner

Dated: 20^th February, 2008

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB

SCO No. 32-33-34, Sector -17-C, CHANDIGARH
Sh. Gurbaksh Singh,

# 80, Premier Complex,

Chandigarh Road,

Ludhiana.

…………………………….Complainant
Vs.

Public Information Officer

O/o Distt. Transport,

Officer, Moga.

……………………………..Respondent
CC No. 1530 of 2007
Present: (i) Sh. Gurbaksh Singh, Complainant

(ii) None is present on behalf of the Respondent.

ORDER

Heard.
2. Complainant states that no further information has been supplied to him and has further stated that he has supplied the copy of the relevant rules and had already been supplied by him for which he has asked for the information but no information has been supplied to him one more chance has given to the Respondent with the direction that before the next date of hearing complete information be supplied to the Complainant otherwise, it will be presumed that information has not been supplied deliberately and action will be taken against the Respondent under Section of the RTI Act,2005.

3. Adjourned to 19.03.08 (10.30 AM) for further proceedings. Copies of the order be sent to the parties.
Sd/-

(Kulbir Singh)

State Information Commissioner

Dated: 20^th February, 2008

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB

SCO No. 32-33-34, Sector -17-C, CHANDIGARH
Sh. Sohan Lal, (President)

Prabandh Samiti Arya Kanya Vidyala,

Kharar, Distt. Mohali.
…………………………….Complainant
Vs.

Public Information Officer

O/o D.P.I. (S)

SCO – 95-97,

Sector – 17/D,

Chandigarh.

……………………………..Respondent
CC No. 1555 of 2007
Present: (i) None is present on behalf of the Complainant

(ii) Sh. Pawan Kumar, Sr. Assistant on behalf of the Respondent

ORDER

Heard
2. Respondent states that the required information has been sent to the Complainant by post. Copy of the same has been sent to the Commission also. The Complainant is not present. It, therefore, cannot be ascertained whether the information as demanded by the Complainant stands supplied to him. In the absence of the Complainant, however, it would be futile to keep this matter pending.

3. The case is accordingly Disposed of. Copies of the order be sent to the parties
Sd/-

(Kulbir Singh)

State Information Commissioner

Dated: 20^th February, 2008

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB

SCO No. 32-33-34, Sector -17-C, CHANDIGARH

Sh. Joginder Pal,

# 32, Ashok Nagar,

Maqsoodan, Jalandhar City,

…………………………….Complainant
Vs.

Public Information Officer

O/o Commissioner,

Municipal Corporation,

Jalandhar.
……………………………..Respondent
CC No. 1327 of 2007
Present: (i) Sh. Joginder Pal, Complainant

(ii) Sh. M.D.Sharma, Executive Engineer on behalf of the Respondent.

ORDER

Heard.
2. Complainant states that he is not satisfied with the information supplied to him. The copies of the bills supplied to him are not legible. He should be supplied typed copies of the bills and also of the tenders. Respondent is directed to supply one clear copy of the final bill (abstract of cost) or last bill and also the copy of the tenders to the Complainant within one week. Respondent agrees to supply the typed or legible hand written copies of the bill and the tenders within one week. Complainant further states that he has filed the application for information on 18.01.07 and it took more than one year to get the information from the Municipal Corporation, Jalandhar and wants that Penalty be imposed for the delay in providing the information and compensation be given for the detriment suffered by him as per RTI Act, 2005.

3. In the above circumstances, there is sufficient basis to prima facie show that the information in this case has deliberately not been given to the

Contd…P-2

-2-

Complainant by the Respondent. Accordingly, notice is hereby ordered to be served through registered post to the PIO, Municipal Corporation, Jalandhar to show cause, on the next date of hearing as to why penalty under Section 20, of the RTI, Act 2005 be not imposed on him.

4. Adjourned to 19.03.08 (10.30 AM) for further proceedings. Copies of the order be sent to the parties.

Sd/-

(Kulbir Singh)

State Information Commissioner

Dated: 20^th February, 2008

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB

SCO No. 32-33-34, Sector -17-C, CHANDIGARH
Sh.Harjinder Pal,

S/o Sh. Harbans Lal,

R/o Phul Town,

Patti Jatana,

Tehsil-Phul,

Distt-Bathinda.

…………………………….Complainant
Vs.

Public Information Officer

O/o Director,

Health & Family Welfare,

Chadigarh.

……………………………..Respondent

CC No. 1511 of 2007
Present: (i) Sh. Harjinder Pal, Complainant

(ii) Dr. A.K.Khullar on behalf of the Dr. R.K.Gupta, PIO

ORDER

Heard
2. Respondent states that the required information has been supplied to the Complainant vide letter no. RTI(2)-P:08/378 dated 31.01.08. The Complainant states that he is still not satisfied with the information supplied. As per his application, the information sought is from the year 1990 to 2007 for the S.F.W. posts and the orders vide which persons were appointed/additional charge given.

3. Respondent has agreed that the required information will be supplied after collecting the same from the field offices to the Complainant within 15 days.

4. Adjourned to 27.03.08 (12.00 PM) for further proceedings. Copies of the order be sent to the parties

Sd/-

(Kulbir Singh)

State Information Commissioner

Dated: 20^th February, 2008

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB

SCO No. 32-33-34, Sector -17-C, CHANDIGARH
Sh.Gian Deep Singh,

# 10, VPO-Lalru Mandi,

The.-Dera Bassi,

Distt-Mohali.

…………………………….Complainant
Vs.

Public Information Officer

O/o Officer,

Nagar Council, Rajpura,

Distt- Patiala.

……………………………..Respondent

CC No. 2068 of 2007
Present: (i) Sh. Gian Deep Singh, Complainant.

(ii) Sh. Kamal Deep Sharma, Advocate & Sh. Vinod Kumar Sharma, Superintendent-cum-PIO on behalf of the Respondent

ORDER

Heard.
2. Complainant states that he has been supplied incomplete information. However, some more information is supplied to the Complainant by the Respondent before me today. After going through the same, the Complainant has pointed out that the information relating to point no. 8 has still not been supplied. The information demanded against point no. 8 is the ‘photocopies of the applications of the selected candidates alongwith those of annexures attached with their applications’. Sh. Kamal Deep Sharma, Advocate appearing on behalf of the Respondent states that this information is exempt from disclosure under Section 8(g) of the RTI Act.

3. I have carefully considered the submission made by the Respondent regarding claim of exemption under Section 8(g). Clause (g) of Section 8 exempts from disclosure information which would endanger the life or physical safety of any person or identify the source of information or assistance given in confidence for law enforcement or security purposes. The information sought in

Contd…P-2

-2-
the instant case against point no. 8 is the copies of the applications (alongwith annexures) made by the selected candidates to the posts of primary school teachers pursuant to advertisement issued by the Nagar Council, Rajpura. I fail to see as to how the provisions of clause (g) of Section 8 would be attracted to the information demanded against point no. 8. Copies of the applications made by selected candidates for the posts of teachers recruited by a Nagar Council is, by no stretch of imagination, information of such a nature as would endanger the life or physical safety of any person. It is also not information related to the law enforcement or security purposes. In this premise, I hold that the exemption under clause (g) is not available to the Respondent in relation to the information sought against point no. 8.

4. In view of the foregoing, I direct the Respondent to supply the information to the Complainant against point no. 8 also within 7 days.

3. Adjourned to 11.03.08 (10.30 AM) for confirmation of compliance. Copies of the order be sent to the parties.
Sd/-

(Kulbir Singh)

State Information Commissioner

Dated: 20^th February, 2008

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB

SCO No. 32-33-34, Sector -17-C, CHANDIGARH
Sh. Gurbaksh Singh,

# 80, Premier Complex,

Chandigah Road,

Ludhiana.

…………………………….Complainant
Vs.

Public Information Officer

O/o Distt. Transport Officer,

Ludhiana.

……………………………..Respondent
CC No. 1529 of 2007
Present: (i) Sh. Gurbaksh Singh, Complainant.

(ii) Sh. Sukhraj, Clerk on the behalf of the Respondent.

ORDER

Heard.
2. Complainant states that incorrect, misleading and partial information has been given to him in spite of his personal visit to the office of the PIO and further states that the information is required as per Motor Vehicle Act, Performa for the same had been given to the Respondent. Respondent is given one more chance to give the complete information as per Motor Vehicle Act to the Complainant before the next date of hearing.

3. Adjourned to 19.03.08 (10.30 AM) for further proceedings. Copies of the order be sent to the parties.

Sd/-

(Kulbir Singh)

State Information Commissioner

Dated: 20^th February, 2008