In a bizarre (but otherwise competent) decision, Mr.Habibullah has discovered that "incompetence" is a ground to evade fixing liability for penalty on the PIOs.
http://cic.gov.in/CIC-Orders/Decision_30012008_02.pdf Members must read this decision for evolving scope of disclosure under sections 4(1)(c) and (d) etc. Sarbajit <snip> "We have found above that the information sought by complainant Ms. Gita Dewan Verma has not been provided. Although complainant has not pleaded for penalty the matter has been examined u/s 20 (1). The response both from the Estates Department and the Department of Architecture & Environs and Director (Projects) though incomplete has been given on time. The issue before us therefore, is whether the request for information has been "malafidely denied" or incorrect and incomplete information "knowingly given". As a consequence of having heard all sides in this matter we are of the view that the failure has resulted from incompetence and not malafide. Therefore, while no penalty will lie, Chairman, NDMC is directed to so streamline the processing of applications under the RTI Act as to obviate such a systemic failure in future and to ensure that all such information as is mandated u/s 4 (1) sub-sections (a) (b) (c) and (d) is actually placed on the website, so that civil society is saved from the necessity of having to move applications under the RTI Act to obtain information which should normally be in the public domain."
