Central Information Commission
Mr.Abdul Kalam vs Ut Of Andaman And Nicobar on 27 October, 2011
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2011/001964/15347
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2011/001964
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Mr. Abdul Kalam
Opp. Delanipur Masjid
AIR Road, P.O. Haddo
Port Blair, Andaman and Nicobar Islands
Respondent : Mr. Asif Ali
CEO & PIO UT of Andaman & Nicobar O/o Assistant Secretary Andaman and Nicobar Administration Secretariat, Port Blair RTI application filed on : 12/12/2010 PIO replied : 30/03/2011 First appeal filed on : 22/02/2011 First Appellate Authority order : 22/03/2011 Second Appeal received on : 07/06/2011 Date of Notice of Hearing : 30/09/2011 Hearing Held on : 27/10/2011 S. Information Sought Reply of the Public Information No Officer (PIO)
1. The date of appointment of Shri Hamid Ali Shri Hamid Ali became the member as member in the Wakf board during the of the Wakf Board on 05/03/2009 by previous five year term 2005-10. virtue of his holding the post of Mutawalli, Jama Masjid, and Aberdeen Bazaar.
2. The copy of gazette notification in terms ofNotification dated 04.02.2005 section 14 (9) of Wakf Act 1995 while appointing members and Mutawalli appointing Shri Hamid All as member in the is enclosed at Annexure "A". Wakf board during the previous five year term 2005-10.
3. The date of resignation of Shri Mohammed Shri Mohammed Mansoor quit the Mansoor from the post of chairman in the Chairmanship by stepping down on Page 1 of 4 Wakf board during the previous five year 05/03/2009. term 2005-10.
4. The copy of the resignation in writing under Sh. Mohammed Mansoor did not the hand of Shri Mohammed Mansoor resign. addressed to the state government in terms of Section 19 of Wakf Act 1995 while resigning from chairmanship from the Wakf board during the previous five year term 2005-10.
5. The copy of the Gazette notification No Notification was issued appointing the successor chairperson appointing successor Chairperson. consequent to the resignation of Shri Mohammed Mansoor in terms of Sec 19 of Wakf Act 1995.
6. The name of the successor chairperson (as Shri Hamid Ali has been appointed above at item no.4) so appointed in terms of as successor Chairperson. Sec 19 of Wakf Act 1995.
7. The date of appointment of the above said The successor Chairperson was successor chairperson. appointed on 05/03/2009.
8. The date of completion of the five year term The term of the Board expired on of the Wakf Board in 2005-10 periods. 03/02/2010.
9. Copy of the Gazette Notification concerning No Notification was issued the appointment of Smt. Safeena Khan as appointing Smt Safeena Khan as CEO who was discharging the powers and CEO. Smt Safeena Khan was ordered duties of CEO during 2006 to 2009. to hold the additional charge of CEO vide Administration Order No.692 dated 20.02.2006. Copy is at Annexure --'B'
10. The date on which the official On 08/04/2010 correspondence made to notify the appointment of Shri Mohammed Aktar Hussain in the official gazette to the competent authority (i.e. to make gazette notification of the copy of order No.3289 dt.21/10/09).
11. The date on which the gazette notification of The Gazette Notification has been order No.3289 dt.21/10/09 published published on 21/10/2009. consequent to the correspondence referred to at item no.10.
12. The reason assigned on record 'not to give The Wakf Board for the term 2010- vide publicity/not to invite nominations from 15 has been constituted by the UT stake holders/eligible categories' for the Administration after due constitution of Wakf board for the term 2010- consideration as per Section 14 of the
15. Wakf Act, 1995.
13. The norms set by the UT Administration Reply as at point No. 12 above.
(Referred as state government in the Wakf Act 1995) to prepare the electoral colleges in Page 2 of 4 terms of Wakf Act 1995 section 14 sub section (1) - clause (b) sub-clauses (iii)&(iv).
14. The norms set by the UT Administration to Reply as at point No. 12 above.
prepare the eligible prospective persons for consideration against categories in terms of Wakf Act 1995 section 14 sub section (l) clause (c), (d) & (e).
15. Whether any circular was made out to all the No Circular was issued to departments under the UT Administration to suggest/sponsor officers in the suggest/sponsor officers in the category category specified Section 14 Sub specified in Wakf Act 1995 section 14 sub Section (1.) --clause (e) of the Wakf section(l)- clause (e). Act.
16. Whether any open publicity was made out to No publicity was made.
invite nominations against the category specified in Wakf Act 1995 section 14 sub section(1)- clause (c) & (d).
17. The particulars of arrangement that exists for Constitution of Wakf Board in UT consultations with stake holders/public in Administration of A&N Islands is relation to constitution of Wakf board in made strictly in terms of Section 14 terms of Wakf Act 1995 section 14. of the Wakf Act, 1995.
18. Whether any circular was made out to all the No Circular was issued.
departments under the UT Administration to suggest/sponsor officers in the category specified in Wakf Act 1995 section 23 and Chapter Ill of A & N Wakf Rules 2002 for appointment of CEO at the time of appointment of Shri. Mohammed Aktar Hussain during 2009.
Grounds for the First Appeal:
Incomplete and unsatisfactory information provided by the PIO. Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
The PIO was directed to provide the complete information within 10 working days.
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
Unsatisfactory information provided by the PIO despite FAA's order.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present Appellant: Absent at NIC Center Port Blair. Respondent: Mr. Asif Ali, CEO & PIO Page 3 of 4 The CPIO has provided most of the information but has not provided specific information with respect to query 13, 14 and 17. If specific norms have been fixed the Appellant should be so informed with respect to query 13 and 14. If no such norms exist the same should be stated categorically. As regards to query 17, if any arrangement exists for consultations with stakeholders, the Appellant shall be informed; if no such arrangements exist the same should be stated categorically.
Decision:
The Appeal is allowed.
The CPIO is hereby directed to provide the information to the Appellant as mentioned above, before 20th November 2011 This decision is announced in open chamber. Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties. Any information in compliance with this Order will be provided free of cost as per Section 7(6) of RTI Act.
Shailesh Gandhi Information Commissioner 27 October 2011 (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (IN) Page 4 of 4