Delay in the absence of malafide on the part of the PIO

The documentary requirement for a bus driver in Delhi Transport Corporation (DTC) and other information was sought. The PIO stated that on directions of the FAA, the reply along with copy of Recruitment Rules has been provided to the appellant. During the hearing before the CIC, the PIO tendered his apology for delay in reply by explaining that delay occurred due to reorganization of units within DTC and resultant reshuffling of staff and records. He added that it was unintentional and may be condoned in the interest of justice. He further agreed to file a written submission explaining the reason for delay in giving reply with supporting documents on the CIC’s website and will mark a copy of the same to the appellant. The CIC accepted the apology and condoned the delay in the absence of malafide on the part of the PIO holding it as unintentional.

Comments

The simple deed of sending a timely reply could have saved the PIO from the embarrassment of tendering an apology and would have also avoided the appellant from going through the hassle of filing a complaint. The time frame for filing a reply to the RTI application should be strictly followed by all the PIO’s.

Citation: Rakesh Kumar v. Delhi Transport Corporation, CIC/DTCOR/A/2024/601322; Date of Decision: 30.04.2025

Dr Anuradha Verma (dranuradhaverma@yahoo.co.in) is a RTI Consultant currently working with IIM Vishakhapatnam. She has co-authored the books PIO’s Guide to RTI and Right to Information – Law and Practice. Her weekly article is being published since 2008 on this site. She offers consultancy on RTI matters and third party audit to individuals / organisations. Her other articles can be read at the website of RTI Foundation at the link https://www.rtifoundationofindia.com