Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Hemraj Singh Gurjar vs Central Industrial Security Force on 16 November, 2019

                                   के   ीय सूचना आयोग
                         Central Information Commission
                               बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
                          Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                             नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067



ि तीय अपील सं या / Second Appeal No. CIC/CISFO/A/2018/622580


Hemraj Singh Gurjar                                        ... अपीलकता /Appellant


                                     VERSUS
                                      बनाम


CPIO, O/o the DIG, SZ-                                     ... ितवादीगण /Respondent
APS, Central Industrial
Security Force, Chennai

Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:
RTI : 13.04.2018            FA      : 03.05.2018           SA     :   06.06.2018

CPIO : 03.05.2018           FAO : 14.05.2018               Hearing : 11.11.2019


                                    ORDER

1. The appellant filed an online application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), O/o the DIG, SZ-APS, Central Industrial Security Force, Chennai seeking information pertaining to travelling allowance availed and copy of the tickets submitted by one lady Constable Ms. Paramjeet Kaur, D/o Shri Balwant Singh, bearing CISF Force no. 130818980, to CISF, Bangalore, for encashment of travelling bills for the period June, 2017 to July, 2017.

Page 1 of 4

2. The appellant filed a second appeal before the Commission on the grounds that the CPIO wrongly denied information claiming exemption under Section 24(1) and Second Schedule of the RTI Act, 2005 and that on appeal, the FAA upheld the decision of the CPIO. The appellant, contended that the claim of travelling bills involved corruption, and prayed before the Commission to allow the appeal and direct the respondent to provide the information sought for.

Hearing:

3. The appellant was not present despite notice. The respondent, Shri S.P. Selvam, DIG (CISF), South Zone, CISF, attended the hearing through video conferencing.

4. The respondent submitted that the appellant was informed vide letter dated 03.05.2018 that ITBP has been declared an exempt organization under Section 24(1) read with the Second Schedule of the RTI Act, 2005. Further, the information sought by the appellant does not pertain to allegations of corruption and human rights violations. The provisions of the RTI Act are, therefore, not applicable in this matter. In view of this, the information sought cannot be provided to him under the RTI Act. He further stated that the said reply was ratified by the FAA vide its order dated 14.05.2018. He further stated that they had received an anonymous complaint in regard to the reimbursement of the travelling expenses by the lady Constable Ms. Paramjeet Kaur, on which an enquiry was conducted, wherein it was found that the lady had sought refund of train journey and the same was settled. He further stated that upon inquiry, no corruption was found to be involved, and hence accordingly a reply was provided to the appellant. He further stated that there was animosity between the appellant and the lady Page 2 of 4 constable, and the appellant had filed the present RTI application with mischievous intention to take revenge.

Decision:

5. The Commission, after hearing the submissions of the respondent and perusing the records, observes that in this case information has been sought from an organization to which the RTI Act does not apply as per Section 24(1) of the RTI Act. Further, the information sought does not pertain to allegations of corruption and human rights violations. Hence, information cannot be provided to the appellant.
6. With the above observations, the appeal is disposed of.
7. Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.

Sd/-

Sudhir Bhargava (सुधीर भागव)व) Chief Information Commissioner (मु य सूचना आयु ) दनांक / Date 13.11.2019 Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स यािपत ित) S. S. Rohilla (एस. एस. रोिह ला) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26186535 / [email protected] Page 3 of 4 Addresses of the parties:

1. The First Appellate Authority (FAA) Central Industrial Security Force O/o the DIG, SZ-APS, Chennai, 2nd Floor, "D" Block, Rajaji Bhavan, Besant Nagar, Chennai - 600090
2. The Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) Central Industrial Security Force O/o the DIG, SZ-APS, Chennai, 2nd Floor, "D" Block, Rajaji Bhavan, Besant Nagar, Chennai - 600090
3. Shri Hemraj Singh Gurjar Page 4 of 4 के ीय सूचना आयोग Central Information Commission बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067 ि तीय अपील सं या / Second Appeal No. CIC/CISFO/A/2018/622580 Hemraj Singh Gurjar ... अपीलकता /Appellant VERSUS बनाम CPIO, O/o the DIG, SZ- ... ितवादीगण /Respondent APS, Central Industrial Security Force, Chennai Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:
RTI : 13.04.2018 FA : 03.05.2018 SA : 06.06.2018 CPIO : 03.05.2018 FAO : 14.05.2018 Hearing : 11.11.2019 ORDER
1. The appellant filed an online application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), O/o the DIG, SZ-APS, Central Industrial Security Force, Chennai seeking information pertaining to travelling allowance availed and copy of the tickets submitted by one lady Constable Ms. Paramjeet Kaur, D/o Shri Balwant Singh, bearing CISF Force no. 130818980, to CISF, Bangalore, for encashment of travelling bills for the period June, 2017 to July, 2017.
Page 1 of 4
2. The appellant filed a second appeal before the Commission on the grounds that the CPIO wrongly denied information claiming exemption under Section 24(1) and Second Schedule of the RTI Act, 2005 and that on appeal, the FAA upheld the decision of the CPIO. The appellant, contended that the claim of travelling bills involved corruption, and prayed before the Commission to allow the appeal and direct the respondent to provide the information sought for.

Hearing:

3. The appellant was not present despite notice. The respondent, Shri S.P. Selvam, DIG (CISF), South Zone, CISF, attended the hearing through video conferencing.
4. The respondent submitted that the appellant was informed vide letter dated 03.05.2018 that ITBP has been declared an exempt organization under Section 24(1) read with the Second Schedule of the RTI Act, 2005. Further, the information sought by the appellant does not pertain to allegations of corruption and human rights violations. The provisions of the RTI Act are, therefore, not applicable in this matter. In view of this, the information sought cannot be provided to him under the RTI Act. He further stated that the said reply was ratified by the FAA vide its order dated 14.05.2018. He further stated that they had received an anonymous complaint in regard to the reimbursement of the travelling expenses by the lady Constable Ms. Paramjeet Kaur, on which an enquiry was conducted, wherein it was found that the lady had sought refund of train journey and the same was settled. He further stated that upon inquiry, no corruption was found to be involved, and hence accordingly a reply was provided to the appellant.

He further stated that there was animosity between the appellant and the lady Page 2 of 4 constable, and the appellant had filed the present RTI application with mischievous intention to take revenge.

Decision:

5. The Commission, after hearing the submissions of the respondent and perusing the records, observes that in this case information has been sought from an organization to which the RTI Act does not apply as per Section 24(1) of the RTI Act. Further, the information sought does not pertain to allegations of corruption and human rights violations. Hence, information cannot be provided to the appellant.
6. With the above observations, the appeal is disposed of.
7. Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.

Sd/-

Sudhir Bhargava (सुधीर भागव)व) Chief Information Commissioner (मु य सूचना आयु ) दनांक / Date 13.11.2019 Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स यािपत ित) S. S. Rohilla (एस. एस. रोिह ला) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26186535 / [email protected] Page 3 of 4 Addresses of the parties:

1. The First Appellate Authority (FAA) Central Industrial Security Force O/o the DIG, SZ-APS, Chennai, 2nd Floor, "D" Block, Rajaji Bhavan, Besant Nagar, Chennai - 600090
2. The Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) Central Industrial Security Force O/o the DIG, SZ-APS, Chennai, 2nd Floor, "D" Block, Rajaji Bhavan, Besant Nagar, Chennai - 600090
3. Shri Hemraj Singh Gurjar Page 4 of 4