The Complainant has filed this case alleging deficiency-in-service by the O.Ps, where O.P No.1 is the B.D.O, Bahanaga Block, Bahanaga, Balasore and O.P No.2 is the Public Information Officer-Cum-P.E.O, Aruhabad G.P, C/o. B.D.O, Bahanaga Block, Bahanaga, Balasore.

                    2. The case of the Complainant in brief is that the Complainant on dtd.14.03.2017 had applied for some information regarding the copy of resolution from 01.03.2012 to 31.01.2017 and some other information and had submitted an I.P.O of Rs.10/- (Rupees Ten) only and the Complainant had also prayed on his application to bear all expenses on his side. But on 15.03.2017, the P.I.O has sent a letter to the O.P No.2 vide his Office Letter No.20/R.T.I, dtd.15.03.2017 regarding submission of information under R.T.I Act, 2005 with a memo No.21/R.T.I, dtd.15.03.2017 to the Complainant. On dtd.30.03.2017, the O.P No.2 had sent a letter to the Complainant to deposit Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand) only regarding the Official expenses towards the application filed by the Complainant on 14.03.2017. On dtd.12.04.2017 vide Panchayat Samiti, Bahanaga Office Letter No.1066, dtd.12.04.2017, the O.P No.1 had sent a letter to the Complainant regarding the rejection of the appeal as the Complainant had not deposited the expenses amount of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand) only. Then on 15.04.2017, the Complainant deposited Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand) only vide Money Receipt No.342, dtd.15.04.2017 and the said amount was received by the O.P No.2. Thereafter, the Complainant again filed an application on dtd.15.04.2017 regarding the previous information and the O.P No.1 sent a letter to the Complainant vide his Office Memo No.1393, dtd.29.05.2017 to appear before his Office on dtd.07.06.2017 at 11 A.M for hearing of the appeal and after hearing of the same, the O.P No.1 had decided on his appeal that the Complainant is advised to receive information of 2812 pages (related to Block Office) and deposit excess information fees of Rs.624/- (Rupees Six hundred twenty four) only with P.I.O and also advised to request specific information related to one Office in one application (F.A) and it is also decided that the P.I.O apprehended that G.P is cautioned to be sincere regarding R.T.I work and instructed to provide information related to G.P Office of free of cost within 7 days, but no information or any correspondence made to the Complainant regarding excess money of Rs.624/- (Rupees Six hundred twenty four) only. As the O.Ps have not intimated about the decision, for which the Complainant was unable to receive the information applied for. Moreover, for negligence of service of the O.Ps, the Complainant has also informed the matter to the Collector, Balasore by writing on dtd.17.05.2017. As the O.Ps have not issued any information to the Complainant, it shows deficiency of service and negligence on the part of the O.Ps, which causes harassment to the Complainant. So, he was compelled to file this case before this Forum. Cause of action to file this case arose on 07.06.2017. The Complainant has prayed for serving the information from the O.Ps as filed by him along with compensation and litigation cost.

                    3. Written version filed by the O.P No.1 through his authorized representative, where he has submitted that the Complainant had taken opportunity of R.T.I Act and request for voluminous information of 21 years i.e. from 1997 to 2017 relating to 3 Sections of Block Office and 5 years information from Aruhabad G.P Office (01.03.2012 to 31.01.2017). So, it is a clear instance of harassment to administration. Charging of price/ information fees is justified and legal. At present, information of 2812 pages is ready with P.I.O for disposal and the Complainant may receive the same in any working day from P.I.O by depositing excess information fees of Rs.624/- (Rupees Six hundred twenty four) only. As per petition to Collector by the Complainant, reply has been sent to the Collector by the O.P No.1 vide his Office Letter No.1409, dtd.29.05.2017 under intimation to Complainant. The O.P No.1 has also taken appropriate timely action. So, question of harassment/ negligence does not arise. Neither the O.P No.1 nor his authorized representative was present at the time of hearing of this case. 

                    4. Though the O.P No.2 has appeared in this case, but he has not filed his written version in this case. The O.P No.2 is set ex-parte and he has not participated in hearing of this case.

                    5. In order to substantiate their claim, both the Parties have filed certain documents as per list. It has been argued on behalf of the Complainant that when he had applied for some information regarding the copy of resolution from 01.03.2012 to 31.01.2017 on dtd.14.03.2017 by submitting an I.P.O of Rs.10/- (Rupees Ten) only, but on 15.03.2017, the P.I.O has sent a letter to the O.P No.2 regarding submission of information under R.T.I Act, 2005 with a memo to the Complainant. Thereafter, the O.P No.2 had sent a letter to the Complainant on dtd.30.03.2017 to deposit Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand) only regarding the Official expenses towards the application filed by him. The O.P No.1 had sent a letter to the Complainant on dtd.12.04.2017 regarding the rejection of the appeal as the Complainant had not deposited the expenses amount of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand) only. Then the Complainant deposited Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand) only on 15.04.2017, which was received by the O.P No.2. Thereafter, the Complainant again filed an application on the same date i.e. on dtd.15.04.2017 regarding the previous information and the O.P No.1 sent a letter to the Complainant to appear before his Office for hearing of the appeal on dtd.07.06.2017 and after hearing of the same appeal, the O.P No.1 had decided on his appeal that the Complainant is advised to receive information of 2812 pages (related to Block Office) and deposit excess information fees of Rs.624/- (Rupees Six hundred twenty four) only with P.I.O and also the P.I.O apprehended that G.P is cautioned to be sincere regarding R.T.I work and instructed to provide information related to G.P Office of free of cost within 7 days. But, when no information or any correspondence was made to the Complainant regarding excess money of Rs.624/- (Rupees Six hundred twenty four) only and also the O.Ps have not intimated about the decision, the Complainant was unable to receive the information applied for. Thus, the Complainant has also informed the matter to the Collector, Balasore by writing on dtd.17.05.2017 and as the O.Ps have not issued any information to the Complainant, which amounts to deficiency of service by the O.Ps, for which he was compelled to file this case before this Forum praying for serving the information from the O.Ps as filed by him along with compensation and litigation cost. On the other hand, the O.P No.2 is set ex-parte as mentioned earlier and neither the O.P No.1 nor his authorized representative was present at the time of hearing of this case. So, his pleading remains as it is. In his pleading, he has taken the plea that the Complainant had taken opportunity of R.T.I Act and request for voluminous information of 21 years i.e. from 1997 to 2017 relating to 3 Sections of Block Office and 5 years information from Aruhabad G.P Office (01.03.2012 to 31.01.2017). So, it is a clear instance of harassment to the administration and charging of price/ information fees is justified and legal. It has been also argued that the information of 2812 pages is ready with P.I.O at present for disposal and the Complainant may receive the same in any working day from P.I.O by depositing excess information fees of Rs.624/- (Rupees Six hundred twenty four) only. Moreover, as per petition to the Collector by the Complainant, reply has been sent to the Collector by the O.P No.1 under intimation to the Complainant. The O.P No.1 has also taken appropriate timely action. So, question of harassment/ negligence does not arise. In view of the authority reported in 2015 (1) CPR 171 (NC) in the case of Sanjay Kumar Mishra and others (Vrs.) Public Information Officer (PIO) and others, where in it has been held by the Hon’ble National Commission, New Delhi that two questions mainly come up for consideration before the National Commission in these matters. Firstly, whether a person, seeking information under RTI Act can be said to be a Consumer within the meaning of Section 2 (1) (d) of the Act, and secondly, if he is held to be a Consumer, whether the jurisdiction of the Consumer Forum, in such matters, is barred under the provisions of RTI Act or otherwise. It has been also held by the Hon’ble National Commission that (i) the person seeking information under the provisions of RTI Act cannot be said to be a Consumer vis-a-vis the Public Authority concerned or CPIO/PIO nominated by it, and (ii) the jurisdiction of the Consumer Fora to intervene in the matters arising out of the provisions of the RTI Act is barred by necessary implication as also under the provisions of Section 23 of the said Act. Consequently no complaint by a person alleging deficiency in the services rendered by the CPIO/PIO is maintainable before a Consumer Forum. This principle has also been followed by the Hon’ble State C.D.R Commission, Odisha, Cuttack in First Appeal No.521 of 2013 decided on 08.02.2018.

                    6. So, now on careful consideration of all the materials available in the case record and on the basis of principle laid down by the above Authority as discussed earlier, I am in the opinion that this Consumer case is not maintainable in this Forum, for which the Complainant is not entitled for any relief as prayed for and accordingly, this Consumer case is liable to be dismissed. Hence, ordered:-

                                                     O R D E R

                         The Consumer case is dismissed on contest against the O.P No.1 and on ex-parte against the O.P No.2, but in the peculiar circumstances without cost.

                         Pronounced in the open Forum on this day i.e. the 29th day of October, 2019 given under my Signature & Seal of the Forum.