Central Information Commission
Mrajit Prasad vs Department Of Space on 6 October, 2015
Central Information Commission, New Delhi
File No. CIC/SH/A/2014/001914
Right to Information Act2005Under Section (19)
Date of hearing : 6th October 2015
Date of decision : 6th October 2015
Name of the Appellant : Shri Ajit Prasad,
Scientist/Engineer' SC, Building No.23,
Room No.05, MLD/MEG. Space Application
Centre (ISRO), Jodhpur Tekra Satellite,
Ahmedabad, Gujrat 380015
Name of the Public : Central Public Information Officer,
Authority/Respondent Indian Space Research Organisation
(ISRO) Antariksh Bhavan, New BEL Road, Bangalore 560 231 The Appellant was present at the NIC Studio, Ahmedabad. On behalf of the Respondents, Shri Krishna Kumar, Senior Administrative Officer was present at the NIC Studio, Bangalore.
Information Commissioner : Shri Sharat Sabharwal This matter, pertaining to an RTI application dated 23.1.2014 filed by the Appellant, seeking information on seven points regarding action taken on his representation dated 16.8.2013 addressed to the Chairman, ISRO concerning pay fixation, came up today. The CIC/SH/A/2014/001914 Appellant stated that the information in response to points No. 1, 2, 5, 6 and 7 of the RTI application has not been provided to him. It is seen from the records that vide his letter dated 26.5.2014, the FAA directed the CPIO to provide the information in response to points No. 1, 2, 5 and 7 by applying, if necessary, the severability clause under Section 10 of the RTI Act. The Respondents stated that a communication was sent to the Appellant on 28.8.2014, vide which he was informed, in response to point No. 1, that his representation was not forwarded to the DOPT. With reference to point No.5, he was informed that the Chairman did not make any comment on his representation. In response to point No. 6, it was conveyed to the Appellant that a committee had been constituted to look into the matter and the report submitted by it was being examined. Regarding point No. 7, he was informed that the matter was discussed in the Department Council. We see no ground to fault the above replies of the Respondents. However, with reference to point No. 2 of the RTI application, we direct the CPIO to convey to the Appellant the latest status of the matter concerning his representation dated 16.8.2013, within ten days of the receipt of this order, under intimation to the Commission. We also note that the representation submitted by the Appellant nearly two years ago regarding pay anomaly has not elicited a final response from the Respondents. This period, in our view, should have been sufficient to take a decision in the matter. While the Commission is not competent to give a direction in this regard to the Respondents, we would advise them to take a final decision on the representation of the Appellant at the earliest possible.
2. With the above direction and observations, the appeal is disposed of.
3. Copies of this order be given free of cost to the parties.
CIC/SH/A/2014/001914 Sd/ (Sharat Sabharwal) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against application and payment of the charges prescribed under the Act to the CPIO of this Commission.
(Vijay Bhalla) Deputy Registrar CIC/SH/A/2014/001914