Central Information Commission
Arun Gupta vs North Delhi Municipal Corporation ... on 25 November, 2019
+के न्द्रीयसूचनाआयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबागंगनाथमागग,मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नईददल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
नितीय अपील संख्या / Second Appeal No. CIC/NDMCL/A/2018/119494
CIC/NDMCL/A/2018/131134
CIC/NDMCH/A/2018/168903
CIC/NDMCN//2018/149748/NDMCL
Shri Arun Gupta ... अपीलकताग/Appellant
VERSUS/बनाम
1. PIO/Asstt. Director of Education/K.P.Zone,
NDMC
Through: Smt. B.Bharti, ADE/KPZ ...प्रनतवादीगण /Respondents
Sh. Tarun, APIO
2. PIO/Asstt. Director of Education/Civil Lines,
NDMC
Through: None
Date of Hearing : 21.11.2019
Date of Decision : 22.11.2019
Information Commissioner : Shri Y. K. Sinha
Since both the parties are same, the above mentioned cases are clubbed
together for hearing and disposal.
ARRANGED CHRONOLOGICALLY
Case No. RTI Filed on CPIO reply First appeal FAO
131134 16.09.2017 12.01.2018 31.01.2018 29.03.2018
119494 19.09.2017 26.09.2017 29.11.2017 22.01.2018
149748 20.01.2018 09.05.2018 28.04.2018 07.05.2018
168903 06.08.2018 09.08.2018 29.08.2018 --
CIC/NDMCL/A/2018/131134
Appellant filed the RTI application dated 16.09.2017 seeking information on
three points:-
1. The pay of Smt. Sushil Kumari, teacher presently working as Principal, Malik
Pur School is learnt to have been revised from Rs.5125/-in Scale Rs 4500-125-7000
to .Rs 5500/-in senior scale of Rs 5500-175-9000 with effect from 7-11-1997 with
next date of increment as 1-1-1998. In this connection, provide the following
information:-
(a) Copy of order of competent authority for grant of senior scale to teachers
(b) Copy of rule/instructions/guidelines followed for fixation of pay.
Page 1 of 6
(c) Copy of order fixing her pay in senior scale of Rs.5500-175-9000.
2. Copy of office order fixing the pay of Smt. Sushil Kumari, Principal, Malik
Pur School with effect from 1-1-2006 under CCC Revised Pay Rules 2008 and under
7th CPC from 1-1 2016 along with copy of relevant noting.
3. Provide the Name and designation of the official in whose custody the records are
available and can be inspected.
PIO/S.I./CLZ vide letter dated 12.01.2018 denied information under Section
8(1)(j) of RTI Act, 2005.
Being dissatisfied, the Appellant filed First Appeal dated 31.01.2018. FAA/Dy.
Commissioner(CLZ) vide order dated 29.03.2018 directed PIO/ADE (CLZ) and
Deemed PIO (SI/CLZ) to provide the requisite information to the Appellant
within 15 days.
Feeling aggrieved over the non-compliance of FAO, Appellant approached the
Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
None appeared on behalf of the Appellant despite service of notice for the hearing in advance.
None appeared on behalf of the Respondent/PIO/Civil Lines Zone despite service of notice for the hearing in advance.
Decision:
The order passed by the FAA is grossly improper and the FAA has clearly failed to apply himself before passing the order thereof. Neither Appellant nor his authorised representative is present today to establish the element of public interest. The detailed information sought by the Appellant in this case pertains to Smt. Sushil Kumari, which constitutes third party information and has no nexus with public interest. A generalized assertion of public interest without supporting evidence can not be allowed to be cited to revoke exemptions undoubtedly available for this category of information. Merely quoting the term public interest without justifying its relevance is like a shot in the dark. The plea of the Appellant, in the Second Appeal, that since it is tax payers' money therefore it involves public interest is misconceived. Therefore, in setting aside the order of the FAA the Commission hereby directs the Respondent no. 2/ PIO/Sh. Jagdish Prasad (ADE) Civil Lines Zone, North DMC:
(i). To provide, if available, a. Copy of order of competent authority for grant of senior scale to teachers after redacting the exact pay received by them and b. Copy of rule/instructions/guidelines followed for fixation of pay.
c. For the copy of order fixing the pay of Smt. Sushil Kumari, the same constitutes third party information. However, for the purpose of promoting transparency, as envisaged in the RTI Act, the Respondent no. 2/ PIO/Sh. Jagdish Prasad is directed to disclose only the Pay scale applicable to Smt. Sushil Kumari, Principal, Malik Pur School, and not her Pay fixation orders as sought by the Appellant, for the specific years mentioned in the RTI application.
The PIO is hereby cautioned against the disclosure of any third party information. The information must be provided in compliance with the Page 2 of 6 provisions of Section 10 of the RTI Act, after redacting all the third party personal information therefrom.
(ii). To submit a satisfactory and detailed explanation for a) absenting himself from the hearing, thereby vitiating the proceedings, b) causing an obstruction in the flow of information and c) violation of the provisions of the RTI Act. This explanation must reach the Commission within 3 weeks from the date of issue of this order, failing which necessary action shall be initiated by the Registry, in terms of law.
The appeal is disposed off accordingly, with the above directions.
CIC/NDMCL/A/2018/119494 Appellant filed the RTI application dated 19.09.2017seeking information pertaining to office orders issued by the department in respect of Smt. Sushil Kumari working as Principal, Malik Pur School and Smt. Sudha Anand, Principal, DTU Colony. In this regard, he sought certified true copies of the following orders:
1. Pay scale Rs. 4500-125-7000 as on 1.1.1996 of both the above named officials along with their next date of increment.
2. Copy of pay fixation order in scale Rs. 5000-150-8000 along with relevant official noting in respect of both the above named officials.
3. Copy of pay fixation order in scale Rs. 5500-175-9000 along with relevant official noting in respect of both the above named officials.
4. Copy of pay fixation order w.e.f. 1.1.2016 under 6 th CPC with relevant official noting in respect of both the above named officials. And other related information.
5. Copy of pay fixation order w.e.f. 1.9.2008 after g rant of MACP-II along with with relevant official noting in respect of both the above named officials.
6. Copy of pay fixation order issued fixing their pay after grant of MACP-II in grade pay Rs. 5400/- along with relevant official noting in respect of both the above named officials.
Dy. Director of Education/PIO, Mukerjee Nagar Zone vide letter dated 26.09.2017 transferred the RTI application to the PIO/ADE, Keshav Puram Zone under Section 5 of RTI Act, 2005.
Being dissatisfied, the Appellant filed First Appeal dated 29.11.2017. FAA vide order dated 22.01.2018 directed ADE to furnish the information requisitioned by the Appellant and also provide the certified copies to the Appellant as per the provisions of RTI Act-2005 within 10 days.
Feeling aggrieved over the non-compliance with the FAO, Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
None appeared on behalf of the Appellant despite service of notice for the hearing in advance.
None appeared on behalf of the Respondent no. 2 /PIO/Civil Lines Zone despite service of notice for the hearing in advance.
A submission dated 18.11.2019is filed by the Respondent no.1. Respondent no.1, present during the hearing, while notifying that Smt. Sudha Anand, Principal, DTU Colony is the wife of the Appellant, submits that Page 3 of 6 adequate reply pertaining to her in compliance with the FAO has been duly provided to the Appellant. It is further submitted by the Respondent that information pertaining to Smt. Sushil Kumari, Principal, Malik Pur School, is not available with them and pertains to Respondent no. 2 /PIO/Civil Lines Zone.
Decision:
The submission dated 18.11.2019, filed by the Respondent no.1, indicates that Smt. Sudha Anand had herself permitted her service file dossier to be given to Civil Lines Zone for processing her MACP/fixation. It is however pertinent to mention here that even though the Appellant, as submitted by the Respondent no.1, is the husband of Smt. Sudha Anand, the Respondent no.1 was obliged to follow the provisions of the RTI Act, in this case section 11, before disclosing the information pertaining to the third party, even if it relates to the spouse of the applicant. Nonetheless, the information has now been provided to the Appellant by the Respondent no.1.
As for the information pertaining to Smt. Sushil Kumari is concerned, the same constitutes third party information. Neither Appellant nor his authorised representative is present today to establish public interest. The detailed information as sought by the Appellant in this case pertains to Smt. Sushil Kumari. This constitutes third party information and has no nexus with public interest.
Under the circumstances, for the purpose of promoting transparency, as is envisaged in the RTI act, the Commission hereby directs the Respondent no. 2/ PIO/Sh. Jagdish Prasad (ADE) Civil Lines Zone, North DMC to disclose only the pay scale applicable to Smt. Sushil Kumari, Principal of Malik Pur School, and not her pay fixation orders as sought by the Appellant, for the specific years mentioned in the RTI application.
The PIO is hereby cautioned against the disclosure of any third party information. The information must be provided in compliance with the provisions of Section 10 of the RTI Act, after redacting all the third party personal information therefrom.
The Registry is directed to send copy of complete set of documents of the Second Appeal to the Respondent no. 2/ PIO/Sh. Jagdish Prasad (ADE) for proper disposal of this case.
The appeal is disposed off accordingly, with the above directions.
CIC/NDMCN//2018/149748/NDMCL Appellant filed the RTI application dated 20.01.2018 seeking information on six points pertaining to his complaint letter dated 29.11.2017 and 11.12.2017 regarding excess payment of Pay and Allowances due to wrong fixation of pay( of Smt. Sushil Kumari). In this regard, he sought following information:-
1. Certified copy of note sheet indicating noting by various officials and decision of competent authority on his complaint dated 29.11.2017 up to the date of supply of information.
2. Certified copy of letter, directions and/or instructions issued to concerned subordinates as a follow up action on his above mentioned complaint.Page 4 of 6
3. Certified copy of examination report of feedback obtained with respect to the issue raised in his above mentioned complaint. Provide up to the date of supply of information.
4. If no action is taken on his above mentioned complaint inform the name and designation of officer(s) and staff responsible, but failed to take action on his complaint. And other related information.
Being dissatisfied over no reply, the Appellant filed First Appeal dated 28.04.2018. FAA vide order dated 07.05.2018 directed PIO/ADE (CLZ) to provide point-wise detailed and comprehensive information, as available in the record, to the Appellant free of cost within 15 days.
PIO/S.I./CLZ vide letter dated 09.05.2018 provided point wise information to the Appellant.
After the receipt of FAO dated 07.05.2018 and PIO's reply dated 09.05.2018, Appellant has filed another First Appeal dated 05.06.2018.
Feeling aggrieved over the non-compliance with the FAO dated 07.05.2018 and non adjudication of First Appeal dated 05.06.2018, Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
None appeared on behalf of the Appellant despite service of notice for the hearing in advance.
None appeared on behalf of the Respondent/PIO/Civil Lines Zone despite service of notice for the hearing in advance.
Decision:
Perusal of the available records indicate non-compliance of the FAO. A reply vide letter dated 09.05.2018 has though been provided in response to the RTI application but only after filing of the First Appeal by the Appellant. Thereafter, another appeal was filed before the FAA on 05.06.2018 but the same was not adjudicated.
Under the circumstances, the Commission hereby directs the Respondent no. 2/PIO/Jagdish Prasad (ADE) Civil Lines Zone, North DMC
(i). To provide a revised reply to the Appellant containing a copy of action taken report on his complaint dated 11.12.2017, as sought vide instant RTI application, in terms of the provisions of the RTI Act and under intimation to the Commission, within three weeks from the date of issue of this order failing which necessary action shall be initiated by the Registry, in terms of law.
The PIO is hereby cautioned against the disclosure of any third party information. The information must be provided in compliance with the provisions of Section 10 of the RTI Act, after redacting all the third party personal information therefrom.
(ii). To submit a satisfactory and detailed explanation for a) absenting himself from the hearing, thereby vitiating the proceedings, b) non-compliance with the FAA thereby causing an obstruction in the flow of information and c) violation of the provisions of the RTI Act. This explanation must reach the Commission within 3 weeks from the date of issue of this order, Page 5 of 6 failing which necessary action shall be initiated by the Registry, in terms of law.
The appeal is disposed off accordingly, with the above directions.
CIC/NDMCH/A/2018/168903 Appellant filed the RTI application dated 06.08.2018 seeking information on two points:-
a) Certified copy of Office Order fixing the pay of 35 teachers/principals working under ADE, NMCD in scale of Rs. 5500-9000.
b) Certified copy of the official noting made for fixing the pay in scale of Rs. 5500-
9000 in respect of each of these teachers/principals.
APIO/S.I./K.P.Z vide letter dated 09.08.2018 offered inspection of records to the Appellant.
Being dissatisfied, the Appellant filed First Appeal dated 29.08.2018. Feeling aggrieved over non adjudication by the FAA, Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
None appeared on behalf of the Appellant despite service of notice for the hearing in advance.
Respondent submits that despite several opportunities being offered to the Appellant to conduct inspection of records, he remained absent.
Decision:
Neither the Appellant nor any authorised representative on his behalf is present to contest the case or express dissatisfaction. Moreover, as submitted by the Respondent, the Appellant has not turned up for inspection of records despite several opportunities. Therefore, as also offered by the Respondent, the Appellant is at liberty to approach the Respondent office for inspection of records at a mutually convenient date and time.
The PIO is hereby cautioned against the disclosure of any third party information. The inspection and subsequent copies must be provided in compliance with the provisions of Section 10 and 11 of the RTI Act. While transparency and accountability, requires the disclosure of pay scale of the government employees, seeking corresponding office orders of their pay fixation or other specific details pertaining to officials, without establishing element of public interest is not covered under the RTI Act.
The appeal is disposed off accordingly, with the above directions.
Y. K. Sinha (वाई. के . नसन्द्हा) Information Commissioner(सूचना आयुक्त ) Authenticated true copy (अभिप्रमाणितसत्यापितप्रतत) Ram Parkash Grover (राम प्रकाश ग्रोवर) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक)/011-26180514 Page 6 of 6