M.SRIDHAR ACHARYULU, J. - (1.) INFORMATION Commissioner 1. The Complainant has requested for audio conference on telephone No.23363510. The Public Authority is represented by Mrs. Archana Vishwadeep, DEO, Ms. Neha Shankar, OS(RTI), Ms. Jagdish Prasad, Principal, Mrs. Kamlesh Chauhan, DDE, Smt. Vidya Devi, Mr. Manoj Kumar, OS(RTI) along with 7 other officers from the Directorate of Education, GNCTD, Delhi. FACTS:
(2.) THE Complainant through his RTI application dated 25.09.2013 had sought for information on 2 Points Viz i) Which of the Government Secondary Schools in Delhi under the Directorate of Education, have introduced Punjabi teaching as a third language for the first time afresh in class VI in the academic year 2010 -2014; ii) the number of such students enrolled in Class VI, School -wise. The RTI application of the Complainant was returned to him stating that the IPO was not in Order. Claiming non -furnishing of the information sought, the Complainant has approached the Commission of RTI Act. DECISION
(3.) BOTH the parties made their submissions. The Complainant, Shri Raghubir Singh is a senior citizen of 75 -years old and a law teacher who is associated with the making of the RTI Act before its enactment by the Government. The Commission heard him on the telephone as desired by him. He complained that the Directorate of Education has harassed him by raising meaningless technical issues. They returned the Indian Postal Order of Rs. 10/ - saying that it is not properly drawn, when he claims to have rightly drawn in favour of the Accounts Officer. The Complainant objected to the returning of the Postal Order by PIO by speed post, for which he had to spend more than Rs. 25/ -. He complained that the Directorate has not updated its web -site and appropriate address against whom the Postal Order should be drawn or fee to be paid was not given. The Commission in its earlier decision in S.C. Aggarwal v. Ministry of Home Affairs dated 27.8.2013, issued following directions, about the name of drawee written on the IPO: 11. It needs to be underlined that preamble of the RTI Act provides for setting out the practical regime of right to information for the citizenry in order to promote transparency and accountability in the working of every public authority. This word connotes a pragmatic approach on the part of all concerned in implementing the provisions of this law. The Commission is aware that difficulties are being experienced by the information seekers in depositing the fee and copying charges and consequential delay in provisioning of information. On a thoughtful consideration of the matter, the Commission makes the following recommendations to the Ministries/Departments/Public Authorities of the Central Government u/s. 25(5) of the RTI Act: - - (i) All public authorities shall direct the officers under their command to accept demand drafts or banker cheques or IPOs payable to their Accounts Officers of the public authority. This is in line with clause (b) of Rule 6 of the RTI Rules, 2012. In other words, no instrument shall be returned by any officer of the public authority on the ground that it has not been drawn in the name of a particular officer. So long as the instrument has been drawn in favour of the Accounts Officer, it shall be accepted in all circumstances. (ii) All public authorities are required to direct the concerned officers to accept IPOs of the denomination of higher values vis -vis the fee/copying charges when the senders do not ask for refund of the excess amount. To illustrate, if fee of Rs. 18/ - is payable by the information seeker and if he sends IPO of Rs. 20/ -, this should be accepted by the concerned officer rather than returning the same, for practical reasons. The entire amount will be treated as RTI fee. (iii) All public authorities shall direct the CPIOs and ACPIOs under their command to accept application fee and copying charges in cash from the information seekers in line with Rule 06(a) of the RTI Rules. It is made clear that the CPIOs and APIOs will not direct the information seekers to deposit the fee with the officers located in other buildings/offices. (iv) DoPT shall direct all the CPIOs/APIOs/Accounts Officers to accept money orders towards the deposition of fee/copying charges. This is in line with the order dated 19.9.2007 passed by the Karnataka Information Commission in B.V. Gautma v. Dy. Commissioner of Stamps and Registration, Bangalore. (KIC 2038 CoM 2007). (v) The Department of Posts has issued a detailed Circular No. 103 - 1/2007 -RTI dated 12.10.2007 for streamlining the procedure of handling applications by various CAPIOs which, inter alia contains the following directions: - - "(1) Display of the signboard "RTI APPLICATIONS ARE ACCEPTED HERE" should be made on the notice board/prominent place in the post office. In addition, the names/addresses of the CPIO and appropriate authorities of the Post office should also be displayed. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - (9) The fee alongwith application should be accepted at the same counter and in no case the applicant should be made to visit another counter for depositing the requisite fee." The Department of Posts is required to ensure that the above directions are complied with by all concerned. (vi) As noted herein above, as of now, the RTI applications and the requisite fee are being accepted by the designated Post Offices, numbering above 4700. Considering the size of the country and the number of RTI applicants/applications, the number of designated Post Offices appears to be too small. It has been brought to the notice of the Commission that there are 25,464 Departmental Post Offices and 1,29,402 Extra Departmental Branch Post Offices. The Commission, therefore, advises the Secretary, Department of Posts, to consider designating all 25,464 Departmental Post Offices to accept RTI applications and the requisite fee. (vii) The best solution to the fee related problems appears to be to issue RTI stamps of the denomination of Rs. 10/ - by the Deptt. of Posts. It would be a time and cost effective step. The Commission would urge Department of Posts/DoPT to consider the viability of this suggestion with utmost dispatch." ;