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

B Vasan vs National Productivity Council on 29 June, 2021

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/NPRCL/A/2019/653682
In the matter of:
B Vasan
                                                               ... Appellant
                                      VS
CPIO/DDG(AIP)
National Productivity Council (NPC)
Dr. Ambedkar Institute of Productivity (AIP)
6, Aavin Dairy Road Ambattur Industrial Estate
North Ambattur Chennai - 600 050
                                                               ...Respondent
RTI application filed on          :   19/07/2019
CPIO replied on                   :   31/07/2019
First appeal filed on             :   19/08/2019
First Appellate Authority order   :   Not on Record
Second Appeal dated               :   11/10/2019
Date of Hearing                   :   28/06/2021
Date of Decision                  :   28/06/2021

The following were present:

Appellant: Ms Deepika, rep of the appellant, heard over phone Respondent: Submissions received Information Sought:

The appellant has sought the following information:
1. 2012-2017 Plan funds allotted for AIP, NPC, Chennai
- Lecture block - 1st Floor construction work was carried out as per Govt. specified Norm or not. Provide Measurement Book for passing the bill to the contractor.

- In hostel block renovation - old furniture, cots, tables and A/Cs were disposed of during the said period. Whether any permission was 1 sought from competent authority for disposing of the said items. Provide the details.

- In main building - ground and first floor renovation work was carried out as per Govt. specified norm or not and provide Measurement Book for passing the bill to the contractor.

2. 2017-2022 Plan funds for renovation of Auditorium

- Details of expenditure incurred including cost of New furniture, A/Cs, Fans, Renovation of Auditorium etc.

- In Auditorium - Old furniture, chairs and A/Cs were disposed of during the said period. Whether any permission was sought from competent authority for disposing of the said items.

- Details of revenue generated from sales of disposed old items.

3. Details of Mr. Ravindran who is engaged as Contractual

- Documents regarding engagement of Mr. P V Ravindran.

- Details of payment made to Mr. P V Ravindran towards local conveyance, TA/DA and other allowance during period of his engagement.

Grounds for filing Second Appeal The CPIO did not provide the satisfactory reply and FAA did not pass any order.

Submissions made by Appellant and Respondent during Hearing:

The appellant submitted that he is not satisfied with the reply of the CPIO or the FAA's order as the desired information was not provided to him. He also submitted that his written submissions dated 16.06.2021 may be taken on record while deciding his case wherein he has stated that incomplete information was given to him on point no. 1 of the RTI application. The representative of the appellant during the hearing also submitted that till date no order has been passed by the FAA.
The Commission is in receipt of written submissions from the CPIO dated 17.06.2021 in which he had stated that an appropriate reply was given to the appellant on 31.07.2019. He has also stated that he is willing to provide a copy of the measurement book if directed by the Commission.

Observations:

From a perusal of the relevant case records, it is noted that an adequate reply was given to the appellant vide the letter dated 31.07.2019 whereby categorical replies on all the points raised in the RTI application were given to 2 the appellant. It is further noted that the CPIO in his written submissions has provided some more details to the appellant. For point no.1 he has stated that he is willing to supply a copy of the measurement book to the appellant as in his RTI application he did not specifically ask for the same. Since the appellant is aggrieved with the fact that a copy of the measurement book was not given to him, and he had sought this information in point no 1 of the RTI application,the CPIO is directed to provide the same to the appellant as he too is willing to share the same.
Another issue raised by the representative of the appellant is regarding non- disposal of the first appeal filed by the appellant. In this regard, it is pertinent to mention here that per Section 19(6) of the RTI Act, an appeal under sub- section (1) or (2) shall be disposed of within thirty days of the receipt of the appeal or within such extended period not exceeding a total of forty-five days from the date of filing thereof, as the case may be, for reasons to be recorded in writing. From a plain reading of this section, it is clear that it is incumbent upon the FAA to dispose of the appeal within the stipulated time period. Non- disposal of the first appeal in any organisation not only deprives the appellant of his right to get a formal order on his appeal but also adds to the burden of the Commission being the Second Appellate forum. The Commission expresses its displeasure at the conduct of the concerned FAA for not disposing of the first appeal in the instant matter.
Decision:
In view of the above, the CPIO is directed to provide a revised reply with the relevant information to the appellant on point no.1 as per the discussions held during the hearing within a period of 15 days from the date of issue of this order under intimation to the Commission.
Further, since the FAA has failed to exercise his quasi-judicial powers, the Commission, therefore, cautions the FAA to strictly follow the RTI regime while disposing of appeals and pass a speaking order, after taking due cognizance of the merits of each case. A copy of this order is marked to the concerned FAA for his information. The CPIO is directed to serve a copy of this order on the FAA immediately upon the receipt of the order. He is also directed to ensure strict compliance of this order in future.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.



                                              Vanaja N. Sarna (वनजा एन. सरना)
                                      Information Commissioner (सच
                                                                 ू ना आयु त)
                                         3
 Authenticated true copy
(अभ माणत स यापत        त)


A.K. Assija (ऐ.के. असीजा)
Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक)
011- 26182594 /
 दनांक / Date

Copy to:
FAA
National Productivity Council (NPC)
Dr. Ambedkar Institute of Productivity (AIP) 6, Aavin Dairy Road Ambattur Industrial Estate North Ambattur Chennai - 600 050 4