Central Information Commission
Gp Capt D Viswanath vs Indian Air Force on 26 April, 2022
Author: Vanaja N Sarna
Bench: Vanaja N Sarna
क य सच ु ना आयोग
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
बाबा गंगनाथ माग
Baba Gangnath Marg
मु नरका, नई द ल - 110067
Munirka, New Delhi-110067
File no.: - CIC/IAIRF/C/2020/688718
In the matter of
Gp Capt D Viswanath
... Complainant
VS
1. CPIO
HQ EAC IAF,
Upper Shillong Pin - 793007
2. CPIO
Director of Personal Services,
Air Head Quarters (Vayu Bhavan), Rafi Marg,
New Delhi - 110011
... Respondent
RTI application filed on : 16/03/2020 CPIO replied on : 03/07/2020 First appeal filed on : 29/08/2020
First Appellate Authority order : Not on record Complaint Filed on : 11/10/2020 Date of Hearing : 26/04/2022 Date of Decision : 26/04/2022 The following were present:
Complainant: Heard over phone Respondent: Sq Ld MN Khan, CPIO HQ EAC IAF & Wg Cdr Devender Singh, both heard over phone Information Sought:
The complainant has sought the following information: 1
a. Provide certified copies of order, instructions or policy letters in vogue regarding definition and determination of mental illness, involuntary admission or admission under special circumstances, detention, treatment and discharge for psychiatric evaluation of officers deemed to be mentally ill, in consonance with various sections of Mental Healthcare Act 2017 issued by DGAFMS to all air force medical establishments.
b. Provide certified copies of orders regarding role of Commanding Officer, next of kin and Magistrate in case of involuntary admission or admission under special circumstances, detention, treatment and discharge of officers deemed to be mentally ill in consonance with provisions of Mental Healthcare Act 2017. c. Provide certified copies of all personal applications for redressal of grievances submitted by him while serving at 19 Wg, AF during the period from 2010 to 2012 and remarks of all higher/intermediary authorities with final disposal or redressal given in consonance with provisions of Section 27 of Air Force Act 1950 and Para 622 of Regulations for Air Force.
d. And other related information. Grounds for Complaint The CPIO did not provide any information.
Submissions made by Complainant and Respondent during Hearing: The complainant submitted that since false and misleading information was given to him, the concerned CPIO may be directed to provide the relevant information .
The CPIO, Director of Personal Services submitted that an appropriate reply was given to the complainant on 03.07.2020. He also reiterated the contents of his written submissions wherein he has stated that whatever information was available with them, the same was given to the complainant. He also submitted that the delay in providing a reply was due to outbreak of pandemic in the country.
The CPIO, HQ EAC IAF submitted that appropriate replies were given to the complainant on 01.05.2020 & 14.08.2020. He also reiterated the contents of his written submissions dated 21.04.2022.
Observations:
From a perusal of the relevant case records, it is noted that on points no. 3(a), 3(b) & 3(d), the available information in a point-wise manner was given to the complainant on 03.07.2020. It is further noted that points no. 3(c), 3(e) & 3(f) were transferred to the CPIO, HQ EAC IAF vide the letters dated 20.03.2020 & 03.07.2020. Thereafter, the concerned CPIO had provided some part of the 2 information on point 3(c) and available information on point 3(f) vide the letters dated 01.05.2020 & 14.08.2002. With regard to the other part of point 3(c) & point 3(e), the CPIO had claimed exemption u/s 8(1)(e) of the RTI Act and in the written submissions dated 21.04.2022 the CPIO has properly explained the applicability of Section 8(1)(e) of the RTI Act. The Commission is unable to find any flaw in the replies given as whatever information was available, the same was supplied to the complainant. Since there was no denial of any information, the complaint is not established.
During the hearing the complainant was explained that since he has filed a complaint no relief can be given in terms of Section 19 of the RTI Act and whatever information was available, that has been already given. It is also noted that even though the complainant did not raise any issue regarding the delay, however, it was enquired from the CPIO as to why there was such a long delay, to which he submitted that the same was purely unintentional and was due to Covid-19 outbreak in the country. The Commission accepts the submissions of the CPIO and therefore a lenient view is taken in the matter. Decision:
In view of the above observations no action lies.
The complaint is disposed of accordingly.
Vanaja N. Sarna (वनजा एन. सरना)
Information Commissioner (सच
ू ना आयु त)
Authenticated true copy
(अ भ मा णत स या पत त)
A.K. Assija (ऐ.के. असीजा)
Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक)
011- 26182594 /
दनांक / Date
3