Central Information Commission
Major Vasant Laxman Jadhav Retd vs Ministry Of Home Affairs on 28 August, 2024
Author: Heeralal Samariya
Bench: Heeralal Samariya
के न्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ मागग, मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई दिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
नितीय अपील संख्या / Second Appeal Nos. CIC/MHOME/A/2023/645756
CIC/MHOME/A/2023/645764
CIC/MHOME/A/2023/651986
Shri Major Vasant Laxman Jadhav Retd ... अपीलकताग/Appellant
VERSUS/बनाम
CPIO, Police I Division, PMA Cell, Ministry of ...प्रनतवािीगण /Respondent
Home Affairs
Date of Hearing : 22.08.2024
Date of Decision : 22.08.2024
Chief Information Commissioner : Shri Heeralal Samariya
Relevant facts emerging from appeals:
Since the issues raised in the RTI applications are the same the matters
are clubbed together for hearing and adjudication.
Case RTI Filed CPIO reply First FAO 2nd Appeal
No. on appeal /Complainant
received on
645756 03.04.2023 25.04.2023 25.05.2023 02.06.2023 22.09.2023
645764 03.04.2023 25.04.2023 25.05.2023 02.06.2023 22.09.2023
651986 03.04.2023 25.04.2023 23.05.2023 02.06.2023 17.11.2023
Information soughtand background of the case:
(1)CIC/MHOME/A/2023/645756 (2)CIC/MHOME/A/2023/645764 (3)CIC/MHOME/A/2023/651986 The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 03.04.2023 seeking information on following points:-
"1. Please provide following information under RTI Act 2005.
2. Please give following information with reference to MHA PMA Letter 11019/15/2022/-PMA dated 27 Dec 2022: -
a. Para 1 of above cited MHA (PMA) letter states that recommendation received from BCAS/MCA for PPMG to me was considered by Central Police Awards Committee (CPAC) but CPAC did not recommend PPMG to me. In this regard, please confirm that before CPAC arrived at the decision not to recommend PPMG to me, all CPAC members were officially informed that all my three subordinate support staff have already been awarded gallantry Page 1 of 4 awards including one prestigious Sena Medal for Gallantry by MOD for the same gallantry act which led from the front as Team Head?
b. Para 1 of above cited MHA (PMA) letter states that PPMG to me was considered by CPAC as per the extant guidelines in this regard. However, CPAC did not recommend PPMG to me. In this regard, please confirm specific reference of Gol/MHA(PMA) guidelines with letter number and date which CPAC considered and on the basis of which did not recommend PPMG to me?
c. Para 1 of above cited MHA (PMA) letter states that PPMG to me was considered by CPAC as per the extant guidelines in this regard. However, CPAC did not recommend PPMG to me. In this regard, please confirm specific reference of Gol/MHA(PMA) guidelines with letter number and date which CPAC considered and on the basis of which did not recommend PPMG to me and whether these guidelines were notified in advance to all Gol Departments/Ministries including BCAS& MCA?
d. Para 2 of above cited MHA (PMA) letter states that, As per guidelines in this regard, proposal for awarding gallantry medal viz President's Police Medal for Gallantry (PPMG)/Police Medal for Gallantry (PMG) to police personnel, is considered/reconsidered... From where and how did MHA (PMA) conclude that I am a policeman in service of a State Govt when in fact I was a regular Civil Employee of Gol under BCAS/MCA?
e. My grievances bearing CPGRAMS registration numbers PRSEC/E/ 2022/ 35975 dated 13 Nov 2022 and PRSEC/E/ 2022/41517 dated 23-12-2022 addressed to Hon President of India and pertaining to rejection of officially recommended PPMG to me by my Gol Department/Ministry (BCAS/MCA) by MHA(PMA) were forwarded by Hon Presidents Secretariat to General Administration Department of Govt of Maharashtra (GAD GOM) for redressal but GAD GOM returned the same without any action stating that matter of Gallantry Awards to Gol's Civil Employee pertains to Central Govt. In this connection GAD GOM letter MAA-2023/L.N.28/Office 29A dated 10-03-2023 is att. Hon President Secretariat has regretted this mistake on their part and forwarded these grievances to MHA (PMA) for redressal. Therefore, will MHA (PMA) concede that its contention that my recommendation as Gol's Civil Employee has to come from state govt is inherently mistaken and not as per rule of law?
f. Para 2 of above cited MHA (PMA) letter states that Individual Recommendations/Proposals for Gallantry Awards i.e. PPMG/PMG are not entertained. Is MHA latter 11020/119/93/PMA-Cell 16-5-1994 written in response to MCA letter AV.13024/78/93-SSV04-10-9993 and conveying rejection of PPMG to me without giving any reason, observation, logic or Gol/MHA(PMA) authority for rejection not enough proof that PPMG to me was officially recommended by my Gol Department/Ministry (BCAS/MCA)?
The Under Secretary, Police I Division, PMA Cell & CPIO, Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi vide letter dated 25.04.2023 replied as under:-
"The information sought by you is outside the scope and ambit of the RTI Act, 2005 and does not come under the definition of information specified under Section 2 (f) of RTI Act, 2005. Therefore, the same can not be provided."Page 2 of 4
Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 23.05.2023 and 25.05.2023. The FAA vide order dated 02.06.2023 upheld the reply of CPIO.
Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
Appellant: Present Respondent: Shri D K Singh, CPIO and US, Police I Division The Appellant stated that point wise reply to his RTI queries was not provided by the Respondent.
Shri D K Singh referred to his written submission sent vide letter dated 12.08.2024 the relevant extracts of which are as under:
i. Major Vasant Laxman Jadhav (Retd) has filed multiple grievances, representations, RTls in the last 2-3 years, request for awarding the President's Police Medal for Gallantry (PPMG) for his bravery during Mumbai Serial Bomb Blast in 1993.
ii) In his grievances, Major Vasant Laxman Jadhav (Retd) has informed that he retired from Army in the year 1993 after 19 years of service in Army Bomb Detection & Disposal Expert. And after retirement from Army, UPSC selected him for the post of Dy Commissioner of Security, Bomb Detection & Disposal Squad at Mumbai Airport under Govt. of India, Ministry of Civil Aviation, Bureau of Civil Aviation Security.
iii) As per the received grievances & representations, Major Vasant Laxman Jadhav (Retd) has stated that "Central Govt. Department/ Ministry (BCAS/MCA) had recommended him for PPMG within two years of performance of brave gallantry act. However, MHA (PMA) rejected this official recommendation of Central Govt.
Department/Ministry (BCAS/MCA) without giving any valid reason, observation or logic in their rejection letter 1 1020/1 19/93-PMA dated 16 May 94".
iv) it is mentioned that the stated gallantry proposal as mentioned above is very old (almost 30 years). As per Record Retention Schedule (Annexure A), the records of rejected cases of gallantry proposal are kept for 10 years only. Record file of this stated 30 years gallantry proposal is not available in MHA.
v) in response to the grievances, representations, RTls of Major Vasant Laxman Jadhav (Retd), the under-mentioned facts have been conveyed several times (Annexure B):
"As per guideline in this regard, proposal for awarding gallantry medal viz. President's Police Medal for Gallantry (PPMG)/ Police Medal for Gallantry (PIUG) to Police personnel is considered only if the same is recommended by concerned State/Organization which is then placed before Committee for its consideration. Individual recommendations/proposals for Gallantry award i.e; PPMG/PMG are Page 3 of 4 not entertained. This position has already been intimated you earlier also."
vi) However, despite being apprised to him about the above-mentioned rule position of Gallantry awards (PPMG/PMG), grievances of Major Vasant Laxman Jadhav (Retd.) have been received continuously.
vii) Further, his grievance dated 18.02.2024 was forwarded to Govt. of Maharashtra and Bureau of Civil Aviation Security, Ministry of Civil Aviation for taking appropriate action as deemed fit vide this Ministry's letter dated 13.03.2024. (Annexure C)
viii) As per SOP (Annexure D), the recommendation of gallantry award along with all requisite documents i.e Prescribed Performa, Citation, FIR, Firing Details, Seizure Memo, First Sitrep, Medical documents, Post Mortem & Magisterial Inquiry reports (wherever applicable); is considered in this Ministry, when it is received through the concerned State/Organization. So far, this Ministry has not received any recommendation in this regard.
ix) General Procedures and Guidelines governing above mentioned gallantry awards are available on Ministry of Home Affairs's Website. (URL: https://www.mba.gov.in) Decision:
Keeping in view the facts of the case and the submissions made by both the parties, the Commission is of the view that an appropriate response as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 has been provided by the Respondent since as per the provisions of the RTI Act only such information that is held and available in the records of a public authority can be provided and the CPIO is not required to give opinions/ justifications/ explanations and clarifications. Hence, no further intervention of the Commission is required in the instant matter.
With the above observation, the instant Second Appeals stand disposed off accordingly.
Heeralal Samariya (हीरालाल सामररया) Chief Information Commissioner (मुख्य सूचना आयुक्त) Authenticated true copy (अनिप्रमानणत सत्यानपत प्रनत) S. K. Chitkara (एस. के . नचटकारा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26186535 Page 4 of 4 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)