'No official record with us': ASI replies to RTI plea seeking information about oldest Valmiki Ramayana, Ram temple

In response to an RTI application seeking information regarding the 'original version' of the oldest Valmiki Ramayana discovered in India and the 'oldest Rama Temple', the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) stated that they don't have any official record of the same.

One Samir Sardana had filed an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 before the Center Public Information Officers(CPIO), ASI in August last year. Sardana had sought the following information:

• PIO to state if it has the ORIGINAL VERSION of the oldest Valmiki Ramayana discovered in India, and whether the applicant can inspect and photograph the same
• PIO to state if it has a digital or photo copy of the oldest Valmiki Ramayana discovered in India, and whether the applicant can inspect and photograph the same
• If the PIO does not have the above, the PIO to provide the names of the public authorities which has the above information and transfer the application u/s 6(3) to the said public authority

In reply to Sardana's application, the Dy. Superintendent and the CPIO stated, "No such information is available with CPIO, Monument Section, Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), Headquarter Office, New Delhi."

Against the replies received from the CPIO, ASI Sardana approached the Central Information Commission in the second appeal. He said that he had sought information regarding the original version of the oldest Valmiki Ramayana discovered in India and the oldest Rama Temple discovered in India or Pakistan etc. and in reply, the respondent stated that the information sought is not available and also can’t be shared under section 2 (f) of the RTI Act, 2005.

Sardana contended that this was a totally wrong reply as the application should have been transferred to the concerned office to reply to him directly. He, therefore, requested the Commission to direct the public authority to furnish satisfactory information.

Opposing Sardana's claim, the ASI authorities submitted that they had furnished a reply as per the provisions of the RTI Act and they don’t have any such official record as sought by Sardana in his RTI application hence, no further information remained to be provided to him.

Keeping in view the facts of the case and the submissions made by both the parties, Commission directed the CPIO,

"If the information sought by the Appellant is not available on said points then (they) should furnish an affidavit to the Commission, explaining the factual position regarding the non-availability of the information with their record retention policy...within a period of 21 days from the date of receipt of this order."

Commission also directed that a copy of the said affidavit to be provided to Sardana and said that in case the CPIO files a wrong affidavit, Sardana will have the remedy to approach the court of law under the offence of perjury and contempt of the Commission. Accordingly, the appeal was disposed of.

Case Title: Mr. SAMIR SARDANA v. CPIO, Archaeological Survey of India