Central Information Commission
Mr.Syed Sirajuddin vs Ministry Of Information And ... on 21 October, 2011
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office),
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067.
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2011/001811/15280
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2011/001811
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Mr. Syed Sirajuddin
No.36, Ist Floor, Ist Main, VIth Cross,
Hidayath Nagar, A/C Post, K G Halli,
Bangalore-560045.
Respondent : Mr. S. N. Manjunatha
PIO & Administrative Officer Broadcasting Corporation of India, Prasar Bharati, Doordarshan Kendra, Bangalore.
Karnataka
RTI application filed on : 07/03/2011
PIO replied : 08/04/2011
First appeal filed on : 25/04/2011
First Appellate Authority order : 08/06/2011
Second Appeal received on : 06/07/2011
Sl. Information sought Reply of PIO
a) The action taken on the communications referred in the file, in (a) This office has already completed the
connection with settlement of entire issues, pertaining to my action regarding settlement of your pension.
pension & few related service benefits, which are pending The detailed letter dated 04.05.2009 on point
from the ...... date of retirement, on point to point basis. to point basis which was sent to you/is
enclosed for reference.
b) Whether all the payments enlisted in the said (b) The particulars of payment is enclosed.
communications from Sl. No. 1 to SL. No.14, have been -
settled?. If so kindly furnish the entire details, like mode of payments, the actual amount and other related copies of the documents like sanction, bills, pay-orders, bank remittances etc. if not settled reasons for the same may please be furnished.
c) The said inordinate delay for a period of nearly ten long years (c) The government dues raised by CPWD from the date of retirement, (viz-21-12-2001) has given rise to had been adjusted from DCRG. The suspicion that a few payments like D.C.R.G etc have been government servant cannot take the shelter diverted to some body I some where else, other than the under retirement reasons to escape from the pensioner. If- so kindly furnish the authority of law, 8cbacking payment of dues. There is no rule that the of rules, or specific Govt. of India's instructions, under which pensioner is exempted from non-clearing of such diversions have been made. In other words & clear terms, government dues. It is the responsibility of the it is to state that there is neither any authority nor any rule of pensioner to see all the government dues law is there in the entire C.C.S, & pension rules. Therefore cleared before his retirement from the service. such a diversion (if any), will directly results in misuse & There is no provision of waiving government abuse of powers & tampering & fabrication of documents, dues under present rule. If the action is not leading directly to commitment of offences like, Abetment, acceptable, you can take up the matter with Criminal Conspiracy, Cheating, Criminal Breach of Trust, etc. the CPWD for solving it. Unnecessary on the part of the concerned officers / officials, in the blaming the officials in the department is not department & else where, who are all responsible for such appreciated. debacles, inviting action under sections 107,120,405, & 420 etc. of I.P.C. in case such diversion have not taken place, this para may please be ignored.
d) Whether any departmental or any other enquiry is ordered, as (d)No. suggested in my communication dated 16-04-2010, if so, kindly furnish the entire details to enable me to take further necessary actions in the matter.
Grounds for First Appeal:
Unsatisfactory response received from the PIO.
Order of the First Appellate Authority:
"On going through the appeal, It is brought to the notice of the Appellant that making allegations against the offices and officials and crossing the border of the decency and propriety and also using derogatory and impolite language is not permitted under RTI Act. The CIC in number of cases has held that malafide intention of tarnishing the image of the organization is condemnable. It is further held that the Appellant should refrain from using the RTI as a tool to harass the colleagues. The RTI does not authorize the Appellant to receive the explanation disguised as queries for information. The Appellant should not misuse the RTI to settle the personal scores. It is also held that employees are not expected to question the decisions of the superior in garb of seeking the information. It is also held that in the garb of seeking the information, the Appellant should not attempt to settle disputes relating to internal and functioning of the organization.
The CPIO has provided all the available information. In view of the above, there are no scope to interfere with the order of the CPIO. Hence the appeal is rejected."
Grounds for Second Appeal Unsatisfactory response received from the PIO and FAA.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present Appellant : Mr. Syed Sirajuddin on video conference from NIC-Bengaluru Studio; Respondent : Mr. S. N. Manjunatha, PIO & Administrative Officer on video conference from NIC-
Bengaluru Studio;
The PIO has provided the information to the Appellant but the Appellant would like to inspect the relevant records. The Appellant will give a list of records which he wants to inspection to the PIO before 30 October 2011.
The PIO is directed to facilitate an inspection of the relevant records by the Appellant on 10 November 2011 from 10.30AM onwards at the office of the PIO. In case there are any records or file which the appellant believes should exist, which are not shown to him, he will give this in writing to the PIO at the time of inspection and the PIO will either give the files/records or give it in writing that such files/records do not exist.
Decision:
The appeal is allowed.
The PIO is directed to facilitate an inspection of the relevant records by the Appellant on 10 November 2011 from 10.30AM onwards. The PIO will give attested photocopies of records which the Appellant wants free of cost upto 200 pages. This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties. Any information in compliance with this order will be provided free cost as per Section 7(6) of RTI Ac.
Shailesh Gandhi Information Commissioner 21 October 2011 (In any correspondence on this decision, mentioned the complete decision number.)(ved)