CIC says to CPIO, SEBI that subsection 9 of Section 9 of the RTI should not be used as an exemption provision

[sabharwal786]

The orders of the CIC are as below:

File No.CIC/SM/A/2011/001036, 1037 & 1403

During the hearing, we carefully considered the contents of the RTI applications and the response of the CPIO. The Respondents explained that the administrative warning letters and advisory notes were being issued from time to time by various officers and authorities within the SEBI in a very large number of files dealt with at different levels and that there was no central database where such administrative warning letters and advised notes was being kept. Therefore, they submitted that a very large number of individual files would have to be scrutinised over a fairly long period of time in order to find out the exact number and details of such warning letters and advisory notes. This, they explained, would be an extremely timeconsuming task and would disproportionately divert resources of the SEBI. While appreciating the difficulties of the SEBI in collecting this information, we would have liked it if the CPIO had passed a more speaking order and had advised the Appellant suitably for seeking the same or similar information in some other form which would have made it easier for the SEBI to provide. In these cases, he has merely used the provisions of subsection 9 of Section 9 of the Right to Information (RTI) Act to deny the information. In future, the CPIO should note that this particular provision should not be used as an exemption provision; this casts a duty on the CPIO to explain why a particular type of information would really disproportionately divert the resources of the public authority.

[karira]

Sponsorer

This should be actually subsection 9 of Section 7 - ie Sec 7(9)