Case Law Details
Razaak K Haidar Vs CPIO (Central Information Commissioner)
EVM which is available with the respondent in a material form and also as samples, as admitted by the respondent during the hearing, is an information under the RTI Act. The Commission also notes that as per the respondent, the software installed in the EVM is an intellectual property of a third party, the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of the third party concerned. However, the respondent had denied the information sought for, erroneously, under Section 6(1) of the RTI Act. The Commission, therefore, directs the respondent to provide an appropriate reply, as per the provisions of the RTI Act, to the appellant within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order under intimation to the Commission.
Full Text of the order of Central Information Commission
1. The appellant filed an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Election Commission of India (ECI), New Delhi, seeking an Electronic Voting Machine (EVM).
2. The appellant filed a second appeal before the Commission on the grounds that the respondent has wrongly denied the information. He contended that as per Section 2(f) and 2(i) of the RTI Act, the definition of ‘information’ and ‘record’ includes model or any sample. Hence, an EVM qualifies as ‘information’ and should be provided to him under Section 6(1) of the RTI Act. The appellant requested the Commission to direct the CPIO to provide the desired information to him, free of cost, to take necessary action against the CPIO and to impose penalty upon him under Section 20 of the RTI Act. In addition to the above, the appellant also requested for compensation.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
