Sequence of events :
(1) On RTI Application denies info stating that info is not available
(2) FAA without Application of mind dittos PIO
(3) State CIC fixes hearing date
(4) Appellant send request well in time to defer the date of hearing by 7 days as he would be out of station, the office of S-CIC does not put up the request to State CIC for deferment. Copies of request for deferment were also sent by the appellant to PIO & FAA - so they knew about the absence of the appellant.
(5) During absence of appellant, 4 days prior to date of hearing, a new PIO send a letter to appellant appending some info (that still need to be verified for correctness) stating that on his personal search he could find the info (mind you this is after the appellant exhausted the 1st Appeal and filed the 2nd Appeal and which was due for hearing in the next 3 days).
(6) On date of hearing, in absence of appellant, the new PIO submitted the copy of his letter to the State CIC and State CIC without going through the case passed an order that as info has been provided, the appeal is disposed.
I have 2 points :
(a) Once the FAA has not provided info by certifying non-availability of info and
(b) post filing of 2nd Appeal and just 4 days before a new PIO sends some info that he could locate it. (All these days the info was available with the Public Authority and proof exist).
How such actions of PIO and FAA covered under the provisions of RTI Act-2005 - which sections - (1) it defies the very spirit of RTI Act-2005 (2) it is harassment to the info seeker and adds to the loads of appeal at State-CIC.
Section 5(3) of RTI ACt-2005 enjoins on PIO to render all assistance to info seeker?