1.Palat Mohandas, Chief Information Commissioner

Present:

1.Palat Mohandas, Chief Information Commissioner

2. P.N. Vijaya Kumar, State Information Commissioner

AP. No. 231/2007/SIC

File No. 2049/SIC-Gen2/2007

Smt. R. Rani Tharasing Appellant

Sakthi, Kavalayoor P.O

Attingal, Thiruvananthapuram.

Vs

The Public Information Officer

Taluk Office

Chirayinkeezh

Attingal.

Respondent

Appellate Authority

Taluk Office

Chirayinkeezh

Thiruvananthapuram.

ORDER

Smt. Rani Tharasing is the appellant in this case.

She had preferred a second appeal under section 19(3) of the Right to Information Act. She had preferred the appeal against the orders of boththe Manamboor Village Officer and also the Tahsildar of Chirayinkeezh, Attingal P.O. The grievance of the petitioner was as follows:-

On 17.2.2006 and on 23.3.2006, she had preferred two requests before the Village Officer, Manamboor for five items of information. This information were rejected vide order dated 12.6.2006. An appeal was preferred against this order before the Appellate Authority on 14.6.2006. Her appeal was partially allowed by the Appellate Authority and some information were furnished. But the major items of information were not available since the records were destroyed. There upon the second appeal. The report of the Appellate Authority addressed to the requester/Appellant was self explanatory and therefore the matter was taken for consideration.

The question that had arisen for consideration was whether, the information was illegally withheld by the Public Information Officer and Appellate Authority? and if so, what was the proper remedy?

This wasa purely personal matter requesting for certain information for the sake of Redressal of certain Civil Disputes. No public interest was involved in this matter. In the statement preferred along with appeal, the petitioner herself had stated, that she was trying to locate her lost property and wanted to fix the boundary to protect the same from encroachers. She wanted the re-survey details as well as the details of her property before the re-survey was effected. She had averred that, she had preferred a civil case in 2004 and had wanted to collect as many details as possible under the Right to Information Act. She had alleged maliceand corruption on the part of the Revenue Officials and would say that they had destroyed the documents to cover the omissions/commissions that they might have committed on the earlier occasions.

A perusal of the request would show that, she was requesting for copy of Tax receipts of one Shri. Shanmugan Acharyand one Shri. Sankaran Achary and also of one Shri. Nagappan. The copy of the Tax receipts relating to Shri. Shanmugan Achary was of the year 1971-1972 and that of Shri. Sankaran Achary was of 1990-1991 and of Shri. Nagappan was of 1988-1989. In the reply furnished by the Village Officer on 12.6.2006, it was clearly stated that document numbers 1 to 3 could not be furnished due to its antiquity and the papers were almost tornand worn -out due to constant use over a period of nearly 38 years. What was available was given to the appellant. In the appeal, all details of the documents as per the re-survey were furnished to her. The statement would show that, she was asked to appear before the Appellate Authority and there was an offer for her to verify of the old documents that she had wanted. The Appellate Authority was willing to part with all the files, documents and such other related things that she had wanted. But she had refused to appear before the Appellate Authority. Both the Appellate Authority as well as the Public Information Officer were of the opinion that, the unavailable records could not be traced out due to its non - availability . It was further submitted that due to antiquity the available documents could not be handled safely lest it should be lost.

However, the Appellate Authority is here by directed to afford a fresh opportunity to the requester to verify the connected records and obtain all documents that are available in connection with her property and neighboring plots,who had allegedly encroached upon her plot. The appellant is at liberty to approach the Appellate Authority within a period of 15 days from the receipt of copy of this order. With this observation, the appeal is closed.

Dated this the 22nd day of March 2008.

sd/-

Palat Mohandas,

Chief Information Commissioner

sd/-

P.N. Vijayakumar

State Information Commissioner

Authenticated copy

Secretary to Commission

ms

Authenticated copy

Secretary to Commission

1