Central Information Commission
Mr.N K Sharma vs Ministry Of Communications And ... on 19 December, 2012
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26101592
File No.CIC/LS/A/2012/000069/BS/1486
Decision Date-December 19, 2012
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Mr. N. K. Sharma
JTO (E), BSNL, DTJ
H/o- Sri Ravindra Nath Pandey (Bank Manager)
Opp. DIG's Residence,
Bypass Road, Daltonganj,
Palamu - 822101 (Jharkhand)
Respondent : CPIO & Superintending Engineer(E)
BSNL
Electrical Circle, C-5408,
Near Jumar Pool, ARTTC Building,
Ranchi- 835217
RTI application filed on : 21/07/2011
PIO replied : 20/09/2011
First appeal filed on : 26/08/2011
First Appellate Authority order : Not enclosed
Second Appeal received on : 17/10/2011
Information sought:
1- What is the parameter of opening Section (Anubhag) in BSNL and what kind of facilities given to JTO (E) Daltonganj Section.
2- Details of amount spent by Daltonganj Section for Establishment since September 2005. 3- Details of leaves taken by JTO (E) Daltonganj since September 2005 and how many days he was absent illegally from Head Quarter.
4- Details of salary, GPF contribution and total amount in GPF fund to JTO (E) Daltanganj since 2008.
5- Reason for not giving upgradation to JTO (E) Daltonganj. 6- Who is responsible for CR records?
7- Details of TA Bills of SE to JTO & Account Department. 8- Details of tenure of JTO (E) at one place.
9- Name and designation of the officer who can approve CL, EL and Medical Leave of JTO(E).
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
Complete desired information has not been provided.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present Appellant: Absent Page 1 of 3 Respondent: Mr. R.K. Srivastava CPIO's representative through VC (M: 9431100074).
The CPIO stated that the information requested by the appellant could not be furnished to him as he has applied on the letterhead of BSNL and had also put his designation as Junior Telecom Officer in his RTI application. He argued that since the appellant has not applied as a citizen the information cannot be disclosed to him under the RTI Act. The appellant is not present for making his submission/contesting the facts.
Decision Notice:
The fact that the appellant is an employee of the respondent public authority clearly identifies him as a citizen of the Country thereby qualifying him to seek information under Section 3 of the RTI Act. Further, in terms of Section 6(2) of the RTI Act an applicant is only required to furnish the details that may be necessary for contacting him. The mere fact that the appellant has filed the RTI application on the letterhead of his employer i.e. BSNL and mentioned his designation below his name does not disqualify him from seeking information under the RTI Act.
Hence, the CPIO should provide the information, as available on record, as per the provisions of the RTI Act to him within 20 days from the date of receipt of this order.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
This decision is announced in open chamber. Copy of this decision notice be given free of cost to the parties.
BASANT SETH Information Commissioner (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (RM) Page 2 of 3 Page 3 of 3