Central Information Commission
Charles J vs Centre For Development Of Advanced ... on 4 October, 2019
Author: Vanaja N Sarna
Bench: Vanaja N Sarna
क य सच ु ना आयोग
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
बाबा गंगनाथ माग
Baba Gangnath Marg
मु नरका, नई द ल - 110067
Munirka, New Delhi-110067
Decision no.: CIC/CDADC/A/2018/124083/01782
File no.: CIC/CDADC/A/2018/124083
In the matter of:
Charles J
... Appellant
VS
Central Public Information Officer
Central for Development of Advanced Computing (CDAC)
Pune University Campus, Ganesh Khind, Pune - 411 007
&
Central Public Information Officer
C-DAC, Vellayambalam, Thiruvananthapuram - 695 033
... Respondents
RTI application filed on : 22/12/2017 CPIO replied on : Not on record First appeal filed on : 31/01/2018
First Appellate Authority order : Not on record Second Appeal dated : 17/04/2018 Date of Hearing : 03/10/2019 Date of Decision : 03/10/2019 The following were present:
Appellant: Present along with his representative. Respondent: Shriniwas Pownilear, Joint Director(Admn) & CPIO, present in person andParmeshwaran Nambodri, Project Engineer, present over VC. Information Sought:
The appellant has sought the following information:
1. Information about action taken/copy of all letters/copy of all communication by CVC & CVO of MeitY sent to CVO of CDAC against appellant's Grievance petitions MINIT/E/2017/00758 dated 04/03/2017 regarding illegal recruitment made by CDAC, Thiruvananthapuram during October 2011.1
2. Provide inquiry report conducted by the Vigilance officials with the appellant at CDAC, Vellayambalam office on 20/07/2017.
3. Provide copy of all the letters/communications sent by MeitY to CDAC in this regards (i.e. against grievance petition MINIT/E/2017/00758).
Grounds for 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 an appropriate reply had been provided to the appellant.
Observations:
From a perusal of the relevant case records, it is noted that even though a point wise reply had been provided to the appellant, however, a copy of the complete investigation report has not been provided to him. During the hearing, the CPIO submitted that the full report contains some information which may not be of any public interest if the same is shared.
The Commission perused the investigation report during the hearing and found that there is nothing in the report which cannot be shared with the appellant except for the names and signatures of all the third parties.
Decision:
Based on the above observation, the CPIO is directed to provide a copy of the investigation report to the appellant after application of Section 10 of the RTI Act, thereby severing the names and signatures of any third party involved therein and any other third party or confidential information , within a period of 07 days from the date of receipt of this order under intimation to the Commission.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Vanaja N. Sarna (वनजा एन. सरना) Information Commissioner (सच ू ना आय! ु त) 2 File no.: CIC/CDADC/A/2018/124083 Authenticated true copy (अ भ मा णत स या पत त) A.K. Assija (ऐ.के. असीजा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011- 26182594 / दनांक / Date 3