PRESIDENT DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SAMBALPUR

                             CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.82/2023

Present-Dr. Ramakanta Satapathy, President,

  Sri. Sadananda Tripathy, Member,

Shri Prem Prakash Panigrahi, Aged about 61 years

S/O-Late Narendra Panigrahi,

R/O- Sakhipada PS-Dhanupali,

Po/Dist-Sambalpur, Odisha-768001.                                      .……….......Complainant.

Vrs.

Surya Narayan Samal, The Public Information officer,

Office of District Sub-Registrar,

Sambalpur-768001, Odisha.                                          …...……….Opp. Party

Counsels:-

1. For the Complainant                   :-         Self
2. For the O.P.s                                 :-         Sri. A.K. Senapati, Govt. Pleader, SBP

Date of Filing:30.05.2023,Date of Hearing :18.09.2023, Date of Judgement : 16.10.2023

  Presented by Dr. Ramakanta Satapathy, PRESIDENT

1. The case of the Complainant is that on 24.04.2023 the Complainant applied for information on payment of Rs. 10/-. The O.P. vide reply dated 16.05.2023 letter No. 1615 not provided the information and stated that purchase of assets both movable and immovable of the employee is personal information and as per provision of Sec.11 (1) of the Right to information Act, 2005 as no consent is given by the employee, information can not be provided. The D.S.R., Sambalpur excluded himself from the employee list. Conduct of the O.P. caused mental agony, harassment and inconvenience and for which the complaint was filed.
2. The O.P. in reply submitted that Surya Narayan Samal is not a necessary party as he was not the Public Information Officer in the office of D.S.R., Sambalpur and accordingly he has not supplied any information to the Complainant in response to application dated 24.04.2023 vide order No. 3308 dated 29.12.2022 of Addl. Dist. Magistrate Cum District Registrar, Sambalpur Surya Narayan Patra was holding post of D.S.R., Sambalpur and designated as First Appellate Authority. Amaresh Chandra Panda, Senior Clerk has been designated as P.I.O. and Priya Ranjan Naik as A.P.I.O. The O.P. denied all the allegations. The P.I.O. of D.S.R. Office is not having the personal information under his custody and property statement submitted by the employee and it may only be accessible with personal user I.D. and password. The information is not available with the P.I.O. or any authority not known to PIO could not be supplied.

The Complainant is regularly harassing the employee of the D.S.R. office, Sambalpur as the authority did not succumb to his earlier demand to register the document with lesser valuation which was illegal. The Claim is vexatious, frivolous and liable to be dismissed with cost.

3. Perused the documents filed by the Complainant. In form ‘A’ on 24.04.2023 the Complainant sought for information from the P.I.O. O/o D.S.R., Sambalpur. The P.I.O. vide letter No. 1615 dated 16.05.2023 provided the list of employees with designation and their tenure in the office and it is alleged by the Complainant that the O.P. has not been included in the list.

Before going to the technicalities of the complaint parties to the complaint to be taken into consideration. Surya Narayan Patra, is not the P.I.O. of the O/o D.S.R., Sambalpur and the information was not provided by him. Sri. Amaresh Chandra Panda has not been made party and Complaint was raised against a wrong person. The complaint suffers from mis-joinder and non joinder of necessary parties.

Accordingly, the complaint is dismissed on contest against the O.P. No cost.

Order pronounced in the open Court today on 16^th day of October, 2023.

Free copies of this order to the parties are supplied.