Central Information Commission
Arun Kumar K P vs Centre For Dna Fingerprinting And ... on 20 July, 2021
Author: Vanaja N Sarna
Bench: Vanaja N Sarna
क य सुचना आयोग
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
बाबा गंगनाथ माग
Baba Gangnath Marg
मुिनरका, नई द ली - 110067
Munirka, New Delhi-110067
File no.: CIC/CDFAD/A/2019/658218
In the matter of:
Arun Kumar K P
... Appellant
VS
Central Public Information Officer
Centre for DNA Fingerprinting and Diagnostics (CDFD),
Opp. Metro Rail Pillar No. NUP-9B,
Inner Ring Road, Uppal, Hyderabad 500039
...Respondent
RTI application filed on : 23/07/2019 CPIO replied on : 11/09/2019 First appeal filed on : 03/10/2019 First Appellate Authority order : 01/11/2019 Second Appeal dated : 28/11/2019 Date of Hearing : 19/07/2021 Date of Decision : 19/07/2021 The following were present:
Appellant: Mr Botuku Ramesh Babu , Rep of Appellant -present over phone Respondent: G. Ravindar , CPIO- present over phone Information Sought:
The appellant has sought the following information:
- Provide the certified copies of extract of the Minutes pertaining to the intimation of CDFD or discussion on the appointments of scientific group leaders/faculty on Tenure Track scheme/model, through Centre of Excellence (CoE) Projects/Fellowships minuted in the Minutes of the meetings of the CDFD Society.1
Grounds for Second Appeal The CPIO and the FAA did not provide the desired information. The CPIO apparently intentionally delayed providing the information and manipulated the information and provided a misleading reply by adding an additional para, which is irrelevant and this was done in order to damage his case which is pending in the Telengana High Court filed against the public authority. Also, the FAA failed to give a personal hearing, before disposing of the case.
Submissions made by Appellant and Respondent during Hearing: The appellant in second appeal stated in addition to the above, that the information provided is liable to be reviewed with the original signed copy of the minutes, as it appears that the CPIO has created or manipulated the information without the knowledge and approval of the signatory, i.e. the Chairman of the society who is also the Union Minister of the Ministry. In case this allegation is found correct, the appellant desired that suitable action be taken to penalize the concerned officers under Sec 20(2) of the RTI Act and reasonable compensation under Sec 19(8)(b) be made payable to him and disciplinary action be taken. This was reiterated during the hearing. The representative also stressed that the DoPT has laid down guidelines in 2013 for CPIOs/ PIOs and only information available should be given, nothing new should be added.
The CPIO reiterated the contents of the reply dated 11.09.2019 wherein the following was provided - extract of the minutes of the 15th Society meeting of CDFD held on 03.11.2010 relating to agenda no 5; extracts of the minutes of the 16th meeting of 22.11.2011; extracts of the minutes of the 17th meeting held on 08.12.2012.It was also informed that the recruitment of various scientific positions are to be made in accordance with the approved recruitment rules of the CDFD dated 03.07.2018 & 30.04.2019 by the Ministry. He also drew attention to the written submissions sent to the Commission dated 12.07.2021 clearly stating that the additional para given regarding the recruitment rules was in the interest of the appellant to know the latest position with regard to the recruitment procedure. The CPIO also stated that the additional para given can be deleted, and a revised copy of the reply can be given, if the appellant so desires.2
Observations:
From a perusal of the records, it is seen that an appropriate reply has been given by the CPIO, though in first appeal the appellant is still challenging the veracity of the extract of the 17th meeting, claiming some para has been added which was not as approved by the concerned authority.The FAA in his order dated 01.11.2019 has in para 7 stated that he perused the original records relevant to the information sought and is fully convinced that the information provided by the CPIO vide letter dated 11.09.2019 is full and complete in all respects.
Decision:
Having carefully gone through the detailed submissions of the appellant and the respondent, it is abundantly clear that the appellant is still nursing a grievance on the genuineness of the extract of the minutes given to him. In fact, the appellant has also approached the High Court in this matter and it is subjudice.Having gone through the FAA's order, it is clear that he has himself seen the original records and satisfied himself regarding the correctness of the information given by the CPIO. Further, in the recent submissions of the CPIO, he has agreed that he gave some extra information regarding the present recruitment procedure to clarify matters to the appellant. The Commission finds no flaw in the replies given by the respondents and accordingly upholds the same. No further relief is warranted.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Vanaja N. Sarna (वनजा एन. सरना) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मा णत स या पत ित) A.K. Assija (ऐ.के. असीजा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26182594 / 3