Central Information Commission
Mr.Sudhir vs Ministry Of Labour And Employment on 8 February, 2013
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26101592
File No.CIC/SM/A/2012/000237/BS/1866
08 February 2013
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Mr. Sudhir
93A, Pocket-6,
Mayur Vihar Phase-3,
Delhi
Respondent : CPIO & Under Secretary
M/o Labour and Employment
DGET
Shram Shakti Bhawan,
Rafi Marg, New Delhi- 110001
RTI applications filed on : 17/08/2011
PIO replied on : 20/09/2011
First appeals filed on : 31/10/2011
First Appellate Authority order : 29/11/2011
Second Appeal received on : 02/02/2012
Information sought:
1- How many officers working in M/o Labour & Employment on Sensitive Posts for three years have been identified for transfers as per letter of JS/CVO? Provide name and designation. 2- How many officers have been transferred provide name and designation? 3- How many officers have not been considered for transfer and the reasons for not being considered for transfer?
4- Till when the process of transfer will be completed. 5- Whether any interest of Administrative Officers will be served by not transferring the officers?
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
The information provided by the PIO is incomplete and unsatisfactory.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present Appellant: Absent Respondent: Mr. P. Mishra CPIO 23718903 The CPIO stated that the information requested by the appellant in his RTI application dated 17/08/2011 has been furnished to him vide letter dated 20/09/2011 and the FAA after verifying the records has also upheld the reply vide order dated 29/11/2011. It is, however, seen from the appellant's 2nd appeal to the Commission that he has alleged that incomplete and Page 1 of 3 misleading information has been provided as according to him the correct information is available in file no. DGET-C-31011/4/2008-VFTA. The CPIO produced the original file notings dated 16/09/2011 before the Commission indicating that the information provided to the appellant has indeed been compiled from file no. DGET-C-31011/4/2008-VFTA mentioned by the appellant. The appellant is not present for making his submissions/contesting the facts.
Decision notice:
The Commission is satisfied that the information as per record has been furnished to the appellant.
The matter is closed.
This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
BASANT SETH Information Commissioner Page 2 of 3 (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (RM) Page 3 of 3