Central Information Commission
Mr. Rajesh Gouhari vs Ministry Of Human Resource Development on 21 January, 2011
In the Central Information Commission
at
New Delhi
File No: CIC/WB/A/2010/000606AD
Date of Hearing : January 21, 2011
Date of Decision : January 21, 2011
Parties:
Applicant
Shri Rajesh Gouhari
H.No. A1/107,
Janakpuri
New Delhi - 110058.
Applicant was present.
Respondent(s)
EdCIL (India) Ltd
Ed.CIL House
18A, Sector - 16A
Noida - 201301.
Represented by : Shri K.S.Mahajan, US, M/o HRD
Information Commissioner : Mrs. Annapurna Dixit
___________________________________________________________________
Decision Notice
As given in the decision
In the Central Information Commission
at
New Delhi
File No: CIC/WB/A/2010/000606AD
ORDER
Background
1. The RTI Application dated 21.11.2009 was filed by the Applicant with the PIO, EdCIL (India) Ltd, Noida. He sought the following information.
a) Copy of the further instructions received by EdCIL from Central Vigilance Commission for stoppage of harassment and victimization to him subsequent to the earlier received by it vide office memorandum no. 006/EDN/057(pt)/39324 dated 9.4.2009.
th
b) Copy of the minutes of 118 meeting of the Board of Directors of EdCIL (India) Ltd.
c) Copy of the comments of Ministry of Human Resource Development on Agenda items no. 13, 14 and th 15 of the 118 Board meeting of EdCIL (India) Ltd.
2. The PIO replied on 24.12.2009 providing point wise information as given under:
a) It is stated Central Vigilalnce Commission has sought certain information/advise from MHRD on a representation filed by Shri Rajesh Gouhari before CVC. The issues raised by Shri Gouhari in his representation before CVC is under examination of MHRD. Further, the reference of CVC to MHRD/EdCIL has been classified as confidential by CVC. Since the issues are under examination of CVC and MHRD and sharing of any information may affect the proper examination at this stage, therefore, it will not be possible for the concerned department to share the information as of now.
Hence the same is denied under 8 (1)(h).
b) EdCIL manual 8 under section 4 (1) (b) (viii) of RTI Act, 2005 which is also placed in the websie www.edcil.co.in debars from access of Board documents including minutes. Furthter information also not provided under section 8 (1)(d)
c) Regarding this it is informed that the document is relating to Board Agenda items and therefore not accessible as placed on website, as mentioned above and also denied under section 8(1)(d) as these are part of Board documents.
3. Not satisfied with the reply, the Applicant filed his first appeal on 14.3.2010 seeking inspection of relevant records and photocopies of documents.
4. The undersigned in the instant case noted that that the Commission had heard an appeal dated 15.2.2010 filed by the Applicant and that vide Order dated 3.3.2010 the then Commissioner had remanded the matter back to the first Appellate Authority with the direction that he decide the matter in accordance with the provisions of the RTI Act.
5. The Appellate Authority had heard the matter in compliance with the decision of the Commission and in his order dated 12.4.2010 decided as follows:
"Against point no.1, the appellant is interest to know whether EdCIL (India) Ltd had received any further instructions from Central Vigilance Commission, New Delhi for stoppage of harassment and victimization to the appellant subsequent to the one received vide office memorandum dated 9.4.09 . In this regard, it is stated that there was one communication from CVC vide OM dated 8.10.09. apparently during the course of perusal of related papers, it was observed that the appellant is also in receipt of the said communication which is confirmed y his Civil Miscellaneous Application dated 11.1.2010 filed by him before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi. Through the said application, it is also noted that the appellant in addition is also in receipt of CVC OM dated 19.11.2009 addressed to MHRD which has also been filed before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi. Therefore, it appears that the appellant is in receipt of required information. The position of EdCIL has already been th explained. Point 2 & 3 relates to specific agenda items of Board of Directors 118 meeting held on 31.8.2009. Technical Section VII of MHRD has informed that the said section has provided the required information in point 2 and 3 vide letter no. 244/2009 TS VII, dated 28.12.2009. Therefore, the appellant is already in receipt of information."
6. Being aggrieved with this reply, the Applicant had filed another appeal before the Commission on 10.5.2010 requesting for proper information which is the appeal being heard in the instant case. Decision
7. After hearing both sides and on perusal of submissions on record, the Commission is of the opinion that there is no justification in the Appellant's complaint that the Appellate Authority's decision had not been complied with. However, in the interest of the Appellant, the Commission directs the PIO to provide once again copies of various documents mentioned by the Appellate Authority in his decision dated 12.4.2010 (already available with the Appellant but obtained in response to another RTI application) along with attested copy of the minutes of 118th meeting of Board of Directors of EdCIL(India) Ltd. Information against point 3 may also be provided to him. The information may be provided to the Appellant by 25.2.2011.
8. The complaint is accordingly disposed of.
(Annapurna Dixit) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy (G.Subramanian) Deputy Registrar Cc:
1. Shri Rajesh Gouhari H.No. A1/107, Janakpuri New Delhi - 110058.
2. The Public Information Officer EdCIL (India) Ltd Ed.CIL House 18A, Sector - 16A Noida - 201301.
3. The Appellate Authority EdCIL (India) Ltd Ed.CIL House 18A, Sector - 16A Noida - 201301.
4. Officer Incharge, NIC.