Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

Rakesh Kumar Wasnik vs Nuclear Power Corporation Of India on 23 December, 2021

                                के   ीय सूचना आयोग
                       Central Information Commission
                            बाबा गंगनाथ माग , मुिनरका
                       Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                        नई  द ली,
                            द ली New Delhi - 110067

ि तीय अपील सं या / Second Appeal No. CIC/NPCOI/A/2019/649043
                                                      649043

Shri Rakesh Kumar Wasnik                                अपीलकता /Appellant
                                                                /Appellant
                                VERSUS/बनाम

CPIO, Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd.         ... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Through: Shri S K Srivastava - CPIO/AGM;
Smt. Surabhi; Shri S R Trivedi - Sr. Manager(HR)

Date of Hearing                      :   22.12.2021
Date of Decision                     :   23.12.2021
Chief Information Commissioner       :   Shri Y. K. Sinha

Relevant facts emerging from complaint:
RTI application filed on               : 18.09.2018
PIO replied on                         : 26.10.2018
First Appeal filed on                  : 19.11.2018
First Appellate Order dated            : 09.08.2019
2nd Appeal dated                       : 25.08.2019
Information sought

and background of the case:

The Appellant filed an online RTI application dated 18.09.2018 seeking information on the following points:

points:-

The CPIO/Assistant Director, irector, CP & CC, vide letter dated 26.10.2018 replied to as under:-

Dissatisfied with thereply reply from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 19.11.2018. The FAA, vide order dated 09.08.2019 upheld the reply of the CPIO.

Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.

Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:

A written submission has been received from CPIO CPIO, NPCL vide letter dated 20.12.2021, extracts whereof are as under:

In order to ensure social distancing and prevent the spread of the pandemic, COVID-19, 19, hearing was scheduled through video conference after giving prior notice to both the parties. Both parties are heard through video conference wherein the Appellant explained that he undertook a course while in service and thereafter when he applied for the post of subsub-officer, officer, he was informed that his qualification is not appropriate for the post which he had applied for.

for Respondent clarified that since the Appellant acquired qu qualification alification from an institution which is not recognised by the Respondent, hence the promotion could not be given to the Appellant. The Respondent averred that thet Appellant had been informed vide letter dated 02.11.2018 as follows:

Decision:

In the light of the above facts, it is noted that information as defined under the provisions of the RTI Act has been provided by the Respondent. The deliberations between parties during the course of hearing reveal that the Appellant seeks redressal of hi his s service related grievance, which cannot be Page 3 of 4 addressed under the RTI Act. The reply furnished by the Respondent is in terms of the provisions of the RTI Act and hence no interference is warranted in this case.

The appeal is disposed off as such.

वाई. के . िस हा) वाई.

Y. K. Sinha (वाई िस हा Chief Information Commissioner (मु य सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स ािपत ित) S. K. Chitkara (एस. के . िचटकारा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26186535 Page 4 of 4