We have carefully considered the facts of the case. In the first place, the request of the Appellant does not amount to information within the meaning of section 2(f) of the Right to Information (RTI) Act. It is not for the CPIO to clarify the provisions of law; he is supposed to only provide the copies of records available in the public authority concerned relevant to the RTI queries. In the present case, the request is not for any specific record. Besides, since the RTI Act defines information as material record, the CPIO can provide the copies of the available records irrespective of the language in which those records are maintained. He cannot translate the contents of the available records into another language on the demand of the information seeker.
5. Therefore, there is no information on the subject which the CPIO can disclose. The appeal is disposed of accordingly.1
Central Information Commission
Mr. K Madhavan vs Department Of Personnel And ... on 14 August, 2013
Central Information Commission, New DelhiFile No.CIC/SM/A/2013/000596
Right to Information Act2005Under Section (19) Date of hearing : 14 August 2013 Date of decision : 14 August 2013 Name of the Appellant : Shri K Madhavan, No. 11, Crescent Road,
Shenoy Nagar, Chennai - 600 030.
Name of the Public Authority : CPIO, Department of Personnel & Training, North Block,
New Delhi.
The Appellant was not present in spite of notice. On behalf of the Respondent, Shri R.K. Girdhar, US was present. Chief Information Commissioner : Shri Satyananda Mishra
2. We heard the submissions of the respondent.
3. In his RTI application, the Appellant had wanted to know if the CPIO or the SPIO or the Central and State Information Commissions were bound to provide the information in English language where the information seeker was not able to read the regional language and, therefore, demanded the information in English language. The CPIO had informed him that there was no such provision in the Right to Information (RTI) Act although he had explained CIC/SM/A/2013/000596
that, normally, the public authority should respond to the information seeker in the language in which the RTI application was made. He had preferred an appeal against this order. The Appellate Authority had disposed of the appeal by upholding the stand taken by the CPIO.
4. We have carefully considered the facts of the case. In the first place, the request of the Appellant does not amount to information within the meaning of section 2(f) of the Right to Information (RTI) Act. It is not for the CPIO to clarify the provisions of law; he is supposed to only provide the copies of records available in the public authority concerned relevant to the RTI queries. In the present case, the request is not for any specific record. Besides, since the RTI Act defines information as material record, the CPIO can provide the copies of the available records irrespective of the language in which those records are maintained. He cannot translate the contents of the available records into another language on the demand of the information seeker.
5. Therefore, there is no information on the subject which the CPIO can disclose. The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
6. Copies of this order be given free of cost to the parties. (Satyananda Mishra)
Chief Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against application and payment of the charges prescribed under the Act to the CPIO of this Commission.
CIC/SM/A/2013/000596
(Vijay Bhalla)
Deputy Registrar
CIC/SM/A/2013/000596
No comments:
Post a Comment