Vinay Kumar vs Csir Hqrs.,New Delhi on 11 March, 2022

[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Vinay Kumar vs Csir Hqrs.,New Delhi on 11 March, 2022

Bench: Vanaja N Sarna

                           क य सुचना आयोग
                    CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                             बाबा गंगनाथ माग
                            Baba Gangnath Marg
                        मु नरका, नई द ल - 110067
                        Munirka, New Delhi-110067

                                               File No. CIC/CSIRD/A/2020/125372
In the matter of:
Vinay Kumar
                                                                    ...Appellant
                                       VS
Central Public Information Officer
Central Scientific Instruments Organization,
Sec 30- C, Chandigarh - 160030.
                                                                  ...Respondent

RTI application filed on          :   23/02/2020
CPIO replied on                   :   05/05/2020
First appeal filed on             :   26/05/2020

First Appellate Authority order : 07/07/2020 Second Appeal filed on : 27/08/2020 Date of Hearing : 10/03/2022 Date of Decision : 10/03/2022 The following were present:

Appellant: Present over VC Respondent: Sanjeev Soni, Senior Principal Scientist and CPIO, present over VC Information Sought The appellant in his second appeal has sought the following information in respect of points 4, 7 and 10 of the RTI application:

4. Copy of his letter of 1993 to the Director, CSIO, requesting for not to pay him HRA due to PEC accommodation.

7. Copies of salary slips from Jan.2005 to Jan.2016.

10. Copy of penal rent Office Memorandum showing revised penal rent.

Grounds for filing Second Appeal The CPIO did not provide the desired information.

Submissions made by Appellant and Respondent during Hearing:

The appellant submitted that he is not satisfied with the reply of the CPIO. The CPIO submitted that a suitable reply was provided vide letter dated 05.05.2020.

Observations:

Based on a perusal of the record, it was noted that the CPIO vide letter dated 05.05.2020 had sent 30 pages documents informing the appellant that the photocopying charges were received but the delay occurred due to COVID. The appellant was not satisfied with the reply and filed a first appeal on 26.05.2020. The FAA vide order dated 07.07.2020 disposed of the first appeal and sent the information on points no. 2,4,6,7 and 10 of the RTI application.

The appellant was still aggrieved and filed a second appeal and pressed for information on points 4,7 and 10 of the RTI application. The reply of the FAA was examined and it was noted that points no. 4 and 10 of the RTI application were suitably replied to. However, point no. 7 was regarding inspection and salary slips and the Custodian clarified during the hearing that the salary slips are not available. However, pay bills are available for some period. Decision:

In view of the above observations, the CPIO is directed to provide the pay bills for the period available in respect of point no. 7 after masking the particulars of other persons figuring in the pay bills within 7 days from the date of receipt of the order.

The appeal is disposed of accordingly.

Vanaja N. Sarna (वनजा एन. सरना) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु!त) Authenticated true copy (अ भ मा णत स या पत त) A.K. Assija (ऐ.के. असीजा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 2 011- 26182594 / दनांक / Date 3

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Central Information Commission