Ms. S. Srilatha vs Ircon International Limited on 1 August, 2019

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Ms. S. Srilatha vs Ircon International Limited on 1 August, 2019

Bench: Neeraj Kumar Gupta

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

िशकायत सं या / Complaint No. CIC/IRCON/C/2017/185907

S Srilatha                                               ...िशकायतकता/Complainant


                                        VERSUS
                                         बनाम


CPIO, M/o. Railways,                                         ... ितवादी/Respondent
IRCON International Limited, CPIO
& GM Mech. Regd. Office Plot No.
C-4, District Centre Saket,
New Delhi - 110017


Relevant dates emerging from the complaint:

RTI : 12-08-2016             FA        : Not on record     Complaint: 29-12-2017

CPIO : 14-09-2016            FAO : 23.08.2016              Hearing: 30-07-2019

                                       ORDER

1. The complainant filed an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), IRCON International Limited, New Delhi seeking information on 13 points, including, inter-alia: (i) disclosure of information under Section 4(1)(b) of the RTI Act; and

(ii) date of joining, copy of appointment letter, copy of agreement, designation of her father Shri S. Shankaraiah, etc. Page 1 of 4

2. Being aggrieved with the response given by the CPIO, the complainant filed a complaint under Section 18 of the RTI Act, 2005 before the Commission on the ground that information has not been provided to her. The complainant requested the Commission to direct the respondent to provide complete information to her and action should be taken against the respondent.

Hearing:

3. The complainant participated in the hearing through video-conferencing. The respondent, Shri Masood Ahmad, CPIO along with Shri P.V. Likhar, DM/HRM were present in person.

4. The complainant submitted her written submissions dated 25.07.2019 and the same has been taken on record. The respondent submitted their written submissions dated 30.07.2019 and the same has been taken on record.

5. The complainant submitted that no information has been provided to her by the respondent. She stated that point-wise reply/information has not been provided to her. The complainant further submitted that the respondent has wrongly rejected her application by stating that similar information has been sought by her brother about their father Shri S. Shankaraiah. The complainant submitted that complete information should be provided to her.

6. The respondent submitted that the information sought by the complainant is very old and is not traceable in their records. He stated that Shri S. Shankaraiah was expired in the year 2003. As per the Ircon's weeding out policy, the personal file of deceased employee has been destroyed after 5 years of death of said employee. Hence, the documents sought by the complainant is not available in their records.

7. The complainant submitted that the respondent has not prima-facie taken the stand as stated by him in para no. 6 supra.

Page 2 of 4

Decision:

8. This may appropriately be treated as second appeal.

9. The Commission, after hearing the submissions of both the parties and after perusal of records, observes that the respondent in his reply dated 14.09.2016 has wrongly denied the information to the complainant. Further, he has not prima facie informed the complainant that the information sought is not available on their records, being 13 years old. Further, the respondent has wrongly sought Rs. 66/- from the complainant in order to supply the copies of replies given to her brother Shri S. Srinivas, as the same was not sought in the RTI application of the complainant.

10. In view of the above, the Commission directs the respondent to make thorough search of their records regarding the information sought by the complainant in her RTI application dated 12.08.2016. The respondent should give point-wise reply/information to the complainant informing her the current position in the matter. Also, if the information is not available in their records, then the respondent should file an affidavit before the Commission deposing that the information sought is not available. A copy of affidavit should also be given to the complainant. The above directions of the Commission should be complied within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.

11. With the above observations, the complaint is disposed of.

Page 3 of 4

12. Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.





                                                               नीरज कु मार गु ा)
                                           Neeraj Kumar Gupta (नीरज           ा
                                                                  सूचना आयु )
                                        Information Commissioner (सू

                                                            दनांक / Date 30-07-2019

Authenticated true copy
(अिभ मािणत स यािपत  ित)



S. C. Sharma (एस. सी. शमा),
Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक),
(011-26105682)



Addresses of the parties:
1.    The CPIO
      IRCON International Limited, CPIO & GM Mech.

Regd. Office Plot No. C-4, District Centre, Saket, New Delhi - 110017

2. Ms. S Srilatha, Page 4 of 4

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Central Information Commission