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 5, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Chiranjeet Mudi vs Border Road Organisation on 5 December, 2019

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

File No : CIC/BRDOR/A/2018/611201

Chiranjeet Mudi                                               ....अपीलकता/Appellant
                                      VERSUS
                                       बनाम
CPIO,
Border Road Organisation,
GREF Centre,
Dighi Camp,
Pune - 411015.                                            ... ितवादीगण /Respondent

RTI application filed on          :   09/10/2017
CPIO replied on                   :   28/10/2017
First appeal filed on             :   22/11/2017
First Appellate Authority order   :   29/12/2017
Second Appeal dated               :   Nil Diarized on 02/02/2018
Date of Hearing                   :   05/12/2019
Date of Decision                  :   05/12/2019

            lwpuk vk;qDr              :       fnO; izdk"k flUgk
   INFORMATION COMMISSIONER :             DIVYA PRAKASH SINHA

Information sought

:

The Appellant sought certified copy of his evaluated answer sheet & Drawing sheet for the exam held on 08.09.2017 against the Advt. no. 1/2016.
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
The CPIO has not provided the desired information.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:-
1
Appellant: Present through VC.
Respondent: Meghraj, Executive Engineer & CPIO, Border Road Organisation, GREF Centre, Dighi Camp, Pune present through VC.
Appellant stated that he is not satisfied with the reply of the CPIO.
CPIO submitted that information sought pertained to copy of evaluated answer sheets etc. for the exam held on 08.09.2017 against the Advt. no. 1/2016 of BRO. He further submitted that BRO (BRDB) is an exempt organization under Section 24 of the RTI Act.
Decision Border Road Development Board (BRDB) has been placed in Second Schedule of the RTI Act vide notification No. GSR 347 dated 28/09/2005 by Central Government in exercise of the power conferred by sub-section 2 of Section 24 of the RTI Act.
The status of General Reserve Engineer Force (GREF) and Border Roads Organization (BRO) in relation to Border Road Development Board (BRDB) has been clarified by Ministry of Shipping, Road Transport and Highways - vide their I.D Note No.F.06/280/BRDB/ADMN-2005 dated 02.03.2006 and Memo No. BRDB/03/199/GE-1, dated 08.09.2009 that "the Border Roads Organization (BRO) is an executive arm of Border Road Development Board (BRDB) and is part of it. Therefore, RTI Act does not apply to BRO except in cases of corruption and human rights violation, as specified in the Act" and that "BRO draws its work force from two streams i.e Army and Civil. The personnel from Civil stream are called as General Reserve Engineer Force,(popularly known as GREF). The officers and subordinates from the Army are posted to BRO on Extra Regimental Employment (ERE) tenure for a period of two and half to three years."

In view of this, nothing contained in this Act shall apply to the BRO and GREF. Section 24(1) of the Act is reproduced below:

2
File No : CIC/BRDOR/A/2018/611201 (1)Nothing contained in this Act shall apply to the intelligence and security organisations specified in the Second Schedule, being organisations established by the Central Government or any information furnished by such organisations to that Government:
Provided that the information pertaining to the allegations of corruption and human rights violations shall not be excluded under this sub-section:
Provided further that in the case of information sought for is in respect of allegations of violation of human rights, the information shall only be provided after the approval of the Central Information Commission, and notwithstanding anything contained in Section 7, such information shall be provided within forty-five days from the date of the receipt of request.
Commission upholds the submission of the CPIO. No further action lies.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
                                          Divya Prakash Sinha ( द    काश िस हा )
                                        Information Commissioner ( सूचना आयु )

Authenticated true copy
(अ भ मा णत स या पत         त)



Haro Prasad Sen
Dy. Registrar
011-26106140 / [email protected]
हरो साद सेन, उप-पंजीयक
 दनांक / Date



                                         3