Harassing by filing multiple repeated RTIs, Expose misuse- CIC About 20 RTI applications filed on the same subject - CIC recommended consolidating all the replies and uploading the same in their official website, so that any similar future RTI application can be immediately disposed of by directing to the website 12 Dec, 2014 The appellant is not present. The Public Authority is represented by Mr. H.R.Sharma, Joint Secretary/PIO and Mr. Navin Kumar Sharma, Superintendent, Department of Health and Family Welfare, GNCTD, Delhi. 2. The appellant/complainant filed the above three complaints against the same Public Authority and hence they are heard together today. As the appellant sought information through these complaints, they are converted as appeals. FACTS File No.CIC/AD/C/2013/001464SA 3. The appellant filed RTI application/complaint on 14.1.2012 seeking information with regard to Medical officers of Delhi government, no. of National Conference attended by them, scheme of govt. under which they are pursuing higher education etc . Having received no reply within the prescribed period, the appellant preferred First Appeal on 16.2.2012. FAA order is not available on the file. File No. CIC/AD/C/2013/001467SA 4. In this RTI application/complaint on 13.1.2012 the appellant was seeking information with name and locality of hospitals under the control of GNCTD and no. of medical officers, J.R, S.R etc appointed by hospital of GNCTD since 1995. Upon not received any reply from the CPIO within prescribed time, the complainant made first appeal on 15.2.2012. The FAA order is not available on the file. 5. In this RTI application/complaint dt. 26.6.2011 the appellant was seeking information with regard to doctors SR, JR working with NDMC, MCD, their qualifications, details of salary, allowances and other facilities provided to them, etc. Having received no reply within the prescribed period, the appellant preferred First Appeal on 29.4.2011. FAA order is not available on the file. 6. Claiming that the respondent authority has not furnished any information to him, the appellant filed Complaints/appeals before the Commission in all the three cases above. Decision: 7. The Public Authority made their submissions. The appellant is not present. The Public Authority brought to the notice of the Commission about its earlier decision in Files Nos.CIC/LS/C/2012/000858SA + 12 files, delivered on 4th July, 2014, wherein the Commission had admonished the appellant for abusing the RTI Act and gave directions to the Public Authority to seek a probe by an appropriate authority into the motive behind the appellant’s repeated RTI questions in such a reckless manner, so that the Public Authority can know whether these questions are guided by public interest or private interest and act accordingly. The respondent officer says they have already replied him and nothing is left to be furnished to the appellant, who is repeatedly submitting the Photostat copies of the RTI application with different addresses and filling up the gaps, as observed by the Commission in its earlier decision quoted above. The appellant has filed about 20 RTI applications on the same subject so far, which are almost similar. For instance travel and attendance, national and international organizations, qualifications of doctors, reservation category, information regarding the physically challenged persons, expenses, transfers, etc. The present three RTI applications/complaints are dealing with such kind of subjects. 8. The Commission again records its admonition against the appellant Mr. Nitish Kumar Tripathi for filing the repeated RTI applications without any focus or specific requirement and recommends the Public authority not to take into consideration the repeated RTI applications by an appellant, on the same subject. The Commission also recommends the Public Authority to consolidate all the replies given to the appellant against his repeated RTI applications and upload the same in their official website and display prominently in their office premises, so that any future RTI application from the appellant on the same subject, can be immediately disposed of by directing to the website. 9. The Commission disposes of all the three complaints accordingly. (M. Sridhar Acharyulu) Information Commissioner Citation: Shri Nitesh Kumar Tripathi v. Department of Health & Family Welfare, GNCTD in 1. File No.CIC/AD/C/2013/001464SA 2. File No.CIC/AD/C/2013/001467SA 3. File No.CIC/AD/C/2013/001477SA Read more at: rtifoundationofindia/about-20-rti-applications-filed-same-subject-cic-r#.VKwcTCuUeho RTI Foundation of India
Posted on: Tue, 06 Jan 2015 17:37:04 +0000