Under RTI PIO not supposed to create info that is not part of record

The appellant re-iterated his submissions made during the last hearing and alleged that vide a letter issued in April, 2012, the CBEC had taken a decision to close the file but the Commissioner of Customs, Kolkata in its reply made during the hearing in a similar matter before the Commission in CIC/KY/A/2014/000304 dated 17.11.2014 and CIC/KY/A/2015/000393 dated 22.06.2015 had submitted that the case is under process hence the information sought was exempt from disclosure as per section 8 (1) (h) of the RTI Act, 2005. The appellant therefore submitted that there was a contradictory stand taken by the respondent at different times and thus questioned how a matter closed in 2012 could stated to be under investigation later in 2014 and 2015.

In reply, the respondent re-iterated the contents of the reply provided by the CPIO, vide letter dated 10.03.2016 and submitted that most of the queries raised by the appellant related to hypothetical questions which did not fall within the purview of Section 2 (f) of the RTI Act, 2005. In reply, the appellant contested that in a similar decision pronounced by the Commission in CIC/KY/A/2015/000247 dated 11.06.2015, the Commission had directed the respondent to provide issue wise complete and categorical information to the appellant within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of order which was not yet complied with.

At the outset the Commission observed that under the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005, only such information as is available and existing and held by the public authority or is under control of the public authority can be provided. The PIO is not supposed to create information that is not a part of the record. He is also not required to interpret information or furnish replies to hypothetical questions. Similarly, redressal of grievance, reasons for non compliance of rules/contesting the actions of the respondent public authority are outside the purview of the Act.

In this context, the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Khanapuram Gandiah v. Administrative Officer and Ors. in SLP (C).34868 OF 2009 (Decided on January 4, 2010) can be cited where it was held as under:

6. “….Under the RTI Act “information” is defined under Section 2(f) which provides:

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.