Only PIO can seek assistance under Sec 5(4)

[karira]

Several members have had the experience where a PIO has sought assistance of some other officer under Sec 5(4) and subsequently the "deemed PIO" has also sought assistance of some other officer under Sec 5(4). Thus the chain under Sec 5(4) keeps growing and the applicant is frustrated.

The CIC has now ruled that is is ONLY the PIO who can seek assistance under Sec 5(4). The "deemed PIO" cannot use this section to seek assistance from someone else. If he does so, then only he will be responsible under Sec 20.

Under Section 5(4) of the RTI Act only the PIO has been given the power to seek assistance from any other
officer to provide information. From a reading of Section 5(5) of the RTI Act, it appears that the officer
whose assistance is sought shall be treated as the PIO only for the purpose of Section 20 of the RTI Act and
not for the purpose of Section 5(4) of the RTI Act. Therefore, the officer whose assistance is sought cannot
transfer the liability of providing the information to another officer. Even if he did seek assistance, he would be the person responsible to provide the information on time and in case of default be liable for penalty under Section 20 of the RTI Act. Justification for the aforesaid may also be found in Section 2(j) of the RTI Act which stipulates that information sought by the Appellant must be held by or be in control of a public authority. The RTI Act does not name any specific officer who must have custody of the information sought. There is an administrative responsibility on the part of the PIO and/ or deemed PIO seeking further assistance to provide the correct and complete information in a timely manner, which cannot be shifted to a subordinate officer.

[jetley]

Sponsorer

The decision will become useful, only when IC's start imvoking penal actions under sec 20 more frequently and diligently