Central Information Commission
Mr.Naveen Kumar Sharma vs Ministry Of Urban Development on 12 January, 2012
Central Information Commission
Room No.307, II Floor, B Wing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New
Delhi110066
Telefax:01126180532 & 01126107254 websitecic.gov.in
Appeal: No. CIC/DS/A/2011/000900
Appellant /Complainant : Shri Naveen Kumar Sharma, New
Delhi
Public Authority : Directorate of Printing (MoUD),
N.Delhi
(Sh. Surendra Singh,Dy.
Director/CPIO)
Date of Hearing : 12 January 2012
Date of Decision : 12 January 2012
Facts:
1. Appellant submitted RTI application dated 22 June 2010 before the CPIO, Directorate of Printing, Ministry of Urban Development New Delhi, seeking the details of the letter No A 12034/2/ReRoPress. Training/2005/496 dated 6 October 2005 regarding the Appellant's Apprenticeship Training Programme with Respondent Public Authority through 10 points enclosed herewith as Annexure A.
2. Vide CPIO Order dated 19 July 2010, CPIO provided point wise information to the Appellant.
3. Not satisfied with the reply of the CPIO, Appellant preferred appeal dated 31 July 2010, before the First Appellate Authority.
4. Vide FAA Order dated 15 September 2010, the FAA provided additional information to the Appellant.
5. Matter was heard today. Both parties as above were present in person and made submissions. Appellant presented document before the Commission which is the Model Contract of Apprenticeship Training in the Case of Major Apprentices which bears the signatures of the appellant and the Assistant Manager government of India Press in which it is clearly stated that the period of training of the appellant is for two years, that is, from 13 October 2005 to 12 October 2007. Appellant pressed for information pertaining to the rules under which this period of training had been subsequently Appeal: No. CIC/DS/A/2011/000900 increased to 3 years. Respondent stated that the period of apprenticeship etc is governed by the DG -E&T of Ministry of Labour who had subsequently, during the period of the appellant's training increased the period of training from two years to 3 years. Appellant submitted that on account of this unilateral decision to increase period of training by one year, he had become overage and therefore ineligible for seeking employment in Government departments.
Decision notice
6. After hearing both parties Commission directs respondent CPIO, to produce before the Commission at the next hearing, a copy of the rules issued by the Competent Authority/Organization under which the Assistant Manager, Government of India Press, had signed the abovementioned contract with the appellant clearly stating that the period of training is two years. Respondent is directed to appear before the Commission along with the above mentioned documents on 26.3.2012 at 3.30 PM at Delhi.
(Smt. Deepak Sandhu) Information Commissioner (DS) Authenticated true copy:
(T. K. Mohapatra) Dy. Secretary & Dy. Registrar Tel. No. 01126105027 Copy to:
1. Shri Naveen Kumar Sharma BlockS, House No. 16A Mohan Garden (Budh Bazaar) Uttam Nagar, New Delhi110059
2. The CPIO Dy.Director Directorate of Printing Min. of Urban Development B -Wing, Nirman Bhawan New Delhi110001 Appeal: No. CIC/DS/A/2011/000900
3. The Appellate Authority Deputy Secretary (P.I) Directorate of Printing Min. of Urban Development B -Wing, Nirman Bhawan New Delhi110001 Appeal: No. CIC/DS/A/2011/000900