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 1, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Sunder Singh vs Municipal Corporation Of Delhi on 7 November, 2008

                     CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                                Room No. 415, 4th Floor, Block IV,
                              Old JNU Campus, New Delhi -110 066.
                                     Tel.: + 91 11 26161796

                                                     Decision No. CIC/WB/A/2007/01424/SG/00181
                                                                Appeal No. CIC/WB/A/2007/01424

Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal



Appellant                                :       Sunder Singh
                                                 186 A, 2nd Floor, I -Block,
                                                 Laxmi Nagar, Delhi-110092.

Respondent 1                             :       Dr. N.K.Yadav.

M.H.O. Cum D.H.S. Municipal Corporation of Delhi Town Hall, Delhi-110006.

RTI filed on                             :       14/05/2007
PIO replied                              :       05/06/2007
First appeal filed on                    :       05/07/2007
First Appellate Authority order          :       13/08/2007
Second Appeal filed on                   :       13/11/2007

Detail of information required:
S.No.               Information Sought.                                The PIO ordered.

1. Whether it is true that as per RRs essential As per RRs. For the post of Malaria qualification for promotion to the post of Malaria Inspector the essential qualification is as Inspector in MCD is under:-

a) Metric from any recognized University a) Matric with Science subject form a or Board. recognized University or Board.
b) Sanitary Inspector diploma course or b) Sanitary Inspector's Diploma or Malaria Inspector course from a Malaria Inspector's course from a recognized institute. recognized Institution.
c) 3 years experience in Mosquito Control fieldwork.

2 Whether promotions to the post of Malaria Yes, in 1982 due to shortage of S.I. diploma Inspector are being made as per RRs. Holders', one month training course was conducted Golf Link under the guidance of NMEP and these candidates were considered for promotion to the posts of MI.

3. Whither it is true that some promotions to the It is true that some promotions to the post of post of Malaria Inspector have been given to MIs has been given by the department to the those, who do not fulfil essential qualification candidates who successfully completed one criteria. month MI Training course

4. Whether Malaria Inspector's course from govt Malaria Inspector Course conducted by Anti link under anti Malaria operation MCD is Malaria Operation, MCD IS NOT affiliate from recognized University or Board if AFFILLIATED TO ANY RECOGNIZED "Yes" attached copy of affiliation if not How Board/University. The promotions were promotions were being given aid who is granted on the recommendations of responsible for such irregularity, what action can competent authority. be taken against him.

5. Whether Malaria Inspector and Sanitary The Pay-Scale of MI-SI are the same and as Inspector pay scale are same give details and on 5th CPC in Rs. 5000-8000 w.e.f. 1.1.96. informed promotion rule. The promotion to the post of MI-SMI is done as per approved R.Rs.

The Appellate Authority ordered:

"The PIO has clarified some of the issue, yet he is unable to comment any more due to none availibity of the concerned filed. A copy of the report is sent herewith to Shri Surender Singh, would satisfy his issues. However, I direct the PIO/MHO to trace out the relevant file at the earliest possible as this an important the and the same must be available with the department. In case the appellant needs further clarification, if any, he may meet the PIO/MHO in this regard, if he desires so."

The appeal is disposed off.

Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:

The following were present Appellant : Absent Respondent : Dr. N.K.Yadav.
The respondent has provided most of the information earlier. On points 2 and 4, some of the information was not available, but has been reconstructed now. The information about the employees in service has been brought before the Commisision. Decision:
The appeal is allowed.
The PIO will send the information to the appellant by 10 November, 2008.
This decision is announced in open chamber. Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
Shailesh Gandhi Information Commissioner 7th November, 2008