Central Information Commission
Mr. Umesh Kumar vs Ministry Of External Affairs on 9 November, 2009
Central Information Commission
CIC/AD/A/2009/001349
Dated November 09 , 2009
Name of the Applicant : Mr. Umesh Kumar
Name of the Public Authority : Ministry of External Affairs
Background
1. The Applicant filed an RTI application on 05.06.09 with the Joint Secretary, MEA seeking information from the Cadre Cell pertaining to the change of his seniority in Grade I of IFS (B) from year 2006 to 2007. Among the thirteen questions raised by the Applicant, some of the pertinent ones were as follows:
a. Reasons for non response of the Respondent to the three representations of the Applicant dealing with the adverse impact on his seniority; b. Whether it is a fact that the principle of continuous officiation had been adopted on the collapse of rota quota and in implementation of the P N Tandon case decision;
c. Copy of detailed and reasoned order passed by the Hon'ble CAT detailing credible reasons for change of principle to fix the seniority in Somnath Chatterjee case;
d. Whether the Ministry objected to the usage of decision in A S Bains' case [a direct recruit PCS officer] in the case of Sh. Somnath Chatterjee [a promotee SO & not a direct recruit];
e. Whether direct recruitment of SOs on the basis of Civil Service Exams was still actually taking place since 1984 and if not, whether it had resulted in collapse of quota;
f. Whether relevant Recruitment Rules were amended to pave way for reintroduction of rota quota rule for implementation of the decision in Somnath Chatterjee case with the approval of DOPT, UPSC & Law Ministry, and, copy of the amended rules;
g. When was the Recruitment Rules [RR] for promotion of SO to Grade I of IFS (B) last amended, and, copy thereof;
h. Whether Hon'ble CAT passed any directions for UPSC for re-scheduling the exam or its result to give relief to the departmental examinees like Sh. Somnath Chatterjee;
i. Dates of DPC meetings for promotion to Grade I of IFS (B) for the years 2002 to 2008, confirming whether the DPC meetings were held as per DOPT model calendar for DPCs;
j. Copy of file notings relating to reference made to L&T Division in Sh. Somnath Chatterjee case and their comments thereon.
2. The CPIO/Joint Secretary vide his letter No. RTI/551/254/2009 dated 25.06.2009 declined the request on the ground that the queries raised by the Applicant in his RTI application did not qualify as "information" as defined under the RTI Act 2005 but was more in the nature of a grievance regarding the manner of fixation of seniority of the Applicant at the time of his promotion to the grade of Section Officer and later to Grade I of IFS (B). Categorizing the RTI application of the Applicant as merely a grievance which cannot be redressed under the RTI Act 2005, the Applicant was advised to approach appropriate legal remedies viz. higher authorities of MEA or the CAT. While explaining that the Ministry's action of implementing different principles at different times for fixing inter-se seniority between candidates promoted on the basis of seniority or those qualifying in Departmental examinations, the CPIO stated that the actions of the Ministry were governed by various judicial pronouncements. The Applicant was offered to inspect the relevant files available with the Cadre Cell and take copies of relevant judgments to understand the basis of interpretations of the judgments by the Ministry.
3. Being thus denied access to information, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 22.07.09 with the Appellate Authority/SS (PD), MEA. While reiterating his RTI query, the Appellant stated that he had not sought redressal of any of his grievances although he had been aggrieved by being pushed down by more than one year due to implementation of the decision in Somnath Chatterjee case thereby drawing an adverse impact on the seniority of the Appellant. However, upon non receipt of any response from the Appellate Authority, the Appellant was constrained to seek recourse of filing Second Appeal before the Central Information Commission on 23.09.2009.
4. The Appellate Authority while responding to the First Appeal by a subsequent communication dated 01.10.2009 largely upheld the decision of the CPIO. In fact even the incorrect stance of the CPIO that the Ministry was not obliged to explain its actions under the RTI Act 2005, was also reiterated and reconfirmed by the Appellate Authority. At the same time, the Appellate Authority provided some information to the Appellant viz. copy of an Office memorandum No. Q/CAD/551/2/2007 dated 26.06.2007, copy of Gazette notification of last amendment of Recruitment Rules and some file notings amounting to twenty pages, upon payment of prescribed fee for photocopies.
5. The Bench of Mrs. Annapurna Dixit, Information Commissioner, scheduled the hearing for 09 November, 2009.
6. Sh. Debraj Pradhan, JS (RTI) & CPIO; Sh. Gaurav Shresth DS (FSP) and Sh. Vijay Kumar, SO (Cadre) represented the Public Authority.
7. The Applicant was present during the hearing.
Decision
8. The CPIO response, reiterated and reconfirmed by the Appellate Authority, stating that the Ministry was not obliged to explain its actions under the RTI Act 2005, was particularly objected to by the Commission and the Respondent Public Authority was accordingly directed to change its attitude towards RTI queries. It was emphatically stated by the Commission that a change in the attitude of the Respondent Public Authority qua RTI Act 2005 was necessitated in order to set out the practical regime of right to information for citizens promoting transparency and accountability in the functioning of every Public Authority.
9. After much deliberations during the hearing, it was agreed upon by the parties, that the Respondent shall allow inspection of the files containing information with respect to the queries (a), (b) and (d) of the RTI request to the Appellant on 17.11.2009 at 10 a.m. With respect to query no. (c) , the copy of the detailed judgment of the Central Administrative Tribunal in the Somnath Chatterjee case to be provided alongwith the Amended Rules against the query no. (f) and also copies of the DPC minutes of the meeting held for the years 2002 to 2008. Upon inspection of the file/s, the Appellant shall be provided copies of all the correspondences and file notings identified by him. The copy of all the documents as sought by the Appellant may be provided to him within 15 days of the completion of the inspection and identification of the documents by the Appellant.
10. The appeal is accordingly disposed of.
(Annapurna Dixit) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy:
(G. Subramanian) Asst. Registrar Cc:
1. Mr. Umesh Kumar US (BOS), Room No. 74 B Ministry of External Affairs South Block, New Delhi
2. The CPIO & Joint Secretary Ministry of External Affairs Akbar Bhawan, Chanakyapuri New Delhi
3. The Appellate Authority O/o Special Secretary (PD) Ministry of External Affairs Room No. 183-A, South Block New Delhi
4. Officer incharge, NIC
5. Press E Group, CIC