In a decision, perhaps first in the region following the implementation of Right to Information (RTI) Act 2005, a consumer court in Mohali has held that a person seeking information under the RTI Act is a "consumer" and the department delaying information can be held liable for "deficiency in service" under the Consumer Protection Act.
The decision was pronounced on Wednesday by the district consumer forum, Mohali, while directing assistant public information officer (APIO) of the Rural Development and Panchayats Department, Punjab, to pay Rs 5,000 as fine along with litigation cost of Rs 2000 for delay in supplying information to the complainant Balraj Kalra.
The directions were passed by the president of consumer forum, Mohali, B S Mehandiratta in a complaint filed by Kalra, a resident of Kotkapura. Pronouncing the orders, the forum held, "Delay in supplying information to an applicant beyond the stipulated period of 30 days amounts to deficiency in service as the fee of Rs 10 paid by the applicant amounts to "consideration", and thus the RTI applicant is a consumer under the Consumer Protection Act. Thus, in such a case a complaint alleging deficiency in service is maintainable before a consumer forum".
While holding that the complainant had been supplied some information after the expiry of 30 days, which was sent by ordinary post, instead of registered post, amounted to "deficiency in service", the district forum directed the department to refund to the complainant Rs 25 for the postal stamps that he had sent to the respondent for supplying information under registered post.
The complainant, Balraj Kalra had sought certain information from the Department of Rural Development and Panchayats, Punjab under the RTI Act. However, the department not only delayed in providing information but also sent the requisite information through ordinary post instead of registered post, as sought by the complainant.
The decision was pronounced on Wednesday by the district consumer forum, Mohali, while directing assistant public information officer (APIO) of the Rural Development and Panchayats Department, Punjab, to pay Rs 5,000 as fine along with litigation cost of Rs 2000 for delay in supplying information to the complainant Balraj Kalra.
The directions were passed by the president of consumer forum, Mohali, B S Mehandiratta in a complaint filed by Kalra, a resident of Kotkapura. Pronouncing the orders, the forum held, "Delay in supplying information to an applicant beyond the stipulated period of 30 days amounts to deficiency in service as the fee of Rs 10 paid by the applicant amounts to "consideration", and thus the RTI applicant is a consumer under the Consumer Protection Act. Thus, in such a case a complaint alleging deficiency in service is maintainable before a consumer forum".
While holding that the complainant had been supplied some information after the expiry of 30 days, which was sent by ordinary post, instead of registered post, amounted to "deficiency in service", the district forum directed the department to refund to the complainant Rs 25 for the postal stamps that he had sent to the respondent for supplying information under registered post.
The complainant, Balraj Kalra had sought certain information from the Department of Rural Development and Panchayats, Punjab under the RTI Act. However, the department not only delayed in providing information but also sent the requisite information through ordinary post instead of registered post, as sought by the complainant.
