Central Information Commission
Mrrakesh vs Ministry Of Defence on 31 May, 2016
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus,New Delhi110067
Tel: +911126106140/26179548
File No. CIC/
CC/A/2014/000254/SD
Date of Decision: 31/05/2016
Relevant facts emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Rakesh Kumar S/O Ranvir Singh
Safaikaramchari
Cantonment Board,
Jalandhar Cantt
Respondent : CPIO
O/o Cantonment Board
Jalandhar Cantt
RTI application : 10/06/2014
filed on
PIO replied on : 21/07/2014
First appeal filed : 30/07/2014
on
First Appellate : No order
Authority order
Second Appeal dated : 08/08/2014
Information Commissioner : Shri Divya Prakash Sinha
Information sought:
Appellant sought the following information regarding Promotion/Change of Designation/Head in Cantt. Board, Jalandhar: 1 Provide details of safaikaramcharis who have been promoted and reason of their promotions since 2010 against the rules and regulations of Cantt fund Servant Rules1937.
2 Provide details of safaikaramcharis recruited since 2007 including date of recruitment, how many safaikaramcharis have been promoted/change of head and strength of civil head safaikaramchari and out of that how many are not working as a conservancy staff and being engaged for some other purpose.
3 Provide details of safaikarmacharis shifted to Tax Branch, Octroi Branch, Water Supply Branch, and other places using illegal means and other related information. 4 Provide the reason of necessity to provide guards among high security zone of military area.1
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
The CPIO has not provided the desired information.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present: Appellant: Present and assisted by Sandeep through VC.
Respondent: Surinder Kumar Dhawan, Office Supdt. & CPIO, Cantt. Board Jalandhar.
Appellant mentioned that he being Deaf and Dumb should have been promoted under the Physically Handicapped (PH) quota of 3%.
CPIO submitted that information asked by the appellant has been provided to him. Only one person Prem Pal (Deaf) who is senior to the appellant has been promoted after 2007 from the PH quota. There is no provision of treating Deaf & Dumb senior to Deaf in PH category.
Decision Commission accepts the submission of CPIO. No further action lies.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
(Divya Prakash Sinha) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy (Raghubir Singh) Dy. Registrar/Designated Officer 2