Central Information Commission
Msharjit Kaur vs Gnctd on 17 March, 2015
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
(Room No.315, BWing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi 110 066)
CIC/SA/A/2014/000546
CIC/SA/A/2014/000547
CIC/SA/A/2014/000548
CIC/SA/A/2014/000549
Appellant : Harjit Kaur
Respondent : Art, Culture & Language
Department, GNCTD Dates of hearing : 18.12.2014 & 1922015 Date of decision : 1732015 Information Commissioner : Prof. M. Sridhar Acharyulu (Madabhushi Sridhar) Referred Sections : Section 3, 19(3) of the RTI Act Result : Appeal allowed/ Disposed of Heard on 18.12.14. Appellant present along with Shri Ajai Kumar. Respondent is represented by Shri Rajesh Sachdeva and Ms.Harpreet Kaur.
CIC/SA/C/2014/000546 (CIC/SA/A/2014/000546 to 549) Page 1
2. The appellant has filed RTI application to PIO, Art and cultural department on 5.10.2013 for seeking 3 point information viz. copy of audit objection raised by ULFA & AGCR in accounts of Punjabi Academy in last 5 years; detail of audit objection removed till date; cultural program or other programs conducted in last 5 years. CPIO on 11.10.2013 has transferred the application to PIO, Punjabi Academy, who on 30.10.2013 asked for inspection on point no 1 &2 and on point no. 3 asked for the specific programme he is seeking information. Being unsatisfied with the CPIO reply, the appellant made first appeal on 2.12.2013. FAA on 26.12.2013 directed the CPIO to provide the information. On noncompliance of FAA order, the appellant made second appeal before the commission. CIC/SA/A/2014/000547
3. The appellant through his RTI application dt 25.9.2013 is seeking 16 point information with respect to appointment of sub accountant, date on which notification issued and in which newspaper, copy to Recruitment rules (R.R) for the post of U.D.C/ Junior Accountant in Punjab academy etc. CPIO on 30.9.2013 has transferred the application to PIO, Punjabi academy. On not receiving any reply from the concern PIO within the prescribed time, the appellant made first appeal on 28.11.2013. FAA on 27.12.2013 has directed the CPIO to provide the information within 21 days. CPIO on 8.1.2014 has provided the information. Being unsatisfied with the information provided, the appellant second appeal before the Commission CIC/SA/A/2014/000548 (CIC/SA/A/2014/000546 to 549) Page 2
4. The appellant through his RTI application dt 28.10.2013 is seeking 8 point information with respect to Recruitment rules (R.R) for the post of U.D.C/ Junior Accountant in Punjabi academy; whether they are paid according to 6 th pay commission; if yes corresponding scale of Steno/Assistant, copy of order of Delhi government and list of staff to whom this facility provided along with office order. CPIO on 21.11.2013 has transferred the application to PIO, Punjabi academy. On not receiving any reply from the PIO within the prescribed time, the appellant made first appeal on 2.12.2013. After FA, concern CPIO on 20.12.2013 asked for payment of money for furnishing documents against point no 1, 5.2, 5.5 & 5.6. FAA on 31.12.2013 directed the CPIO to provide information. CPIO on 8.1.2014 has provided the information. Being unsatisfied with the information provided, the appellant filed second appeal before the Commission. CIC/SA/A/2014/000549
5. The appellant through his RTI application dt 5.10.2013 is seeking copy of Recruitment rules for the post of Deputy Secretary, detail of Mr Jawahar Dhawan appointed to the post of "Deputy Secretary(Admin), perks and facilities provided movable and immovable property provided. CPIO on 11.10.2013 has transferred the application to PIO, Punjabi academy. CPIO on 8.11.2013 has provided the information. Unsatisfied with the information provided, the appellant made first appeal on 2.12.2013. FAA on 26.12.2013 has directed the PIO to provide the information on point no. 5. On 7.1.2014 CPIO has provided the information. Being unsatisfied with the information provided, the appellant filed second appeal before the Commission.
(CIC/SA/A/2014/000546 to 549) Page 3
6. During the hearing, Appellant submitted that she was working as a Drama Officer on contract basis from 2003 to 2013 and she voluntarily resigned on 1.6.2013. She said that she has filed 2022 RTI applications. When the Commission queried: Is there any public purpose behind such request for information? the Appellant said that she was seeking the information to expose the corruption in the office of the Respondent. She added that she has made several complaints in this regard. At that time she could not produce any copy of her complaint. She could not support her contention of public interest. The Appellant went on shouting at the top of her voice, without listening to others, despite the Commission despite requesting her twice. She also alleged that Respondent has taught the Commission to pose such kind of queries. Her behavior was beyond tolerance and she was disturbing entire activity, without allowing the Commission to hear the version of the PIO of the respondent authority. Her misbehavior deserving admonition continued.
DECISION :
7. The Commission took a serious note of this and wanted to know what exactly was the trouble between the appellant and the public authority. However, in this RTI application (CIC/SA/A/2014/000546) Commission directs the PIO to provide the list of objections and action taken against them within thirty days of receipt of this order.
CIC/SA/A/2014/000547 (CIC/SA/A/2014/000546 to 549) Page 4
8. The Commission in present case directs the PIO to provide information on point no 1, 2 ,6, 7, 8, 10 & 12. In point no 3 only no of applications (no need to give the copy of application as if it contained personal information of the applicant), on point no 4 details can be given except phone numbers and addresses, on point 5 details of interview board can be given by the PIO, but on point no. 9, 11,14, 15 & 16 no information could be given. In genial information can be given as to facilities given to public employee given within 1 month from the date of receipt of order. CIC/SA/A/2014/000548
9. The commission in this case directs the PIO to provide information to the appellant on point no 1 to 4, 5(1),(2),(4),(5) and point 7 in general to be answered within one month from the date of receipt of order.
CIC/SA/A/2014/000549
10. The Commission in present case directs the PIO to provide information on point no 1 2(1),(2),(4),(5) , 3 & 4 of the RTI application within 1 month from the date of receipt of information.
11. The Commission found some more cases were filed by her on the same subject matter and against the same public authority, which need to be tried together. In view of the complaint filed on 13th February 2015, by the appellant with allegations of bias and request for transfer of cases from the Commission directs all the cases together on 19.2.2015 where both the parties were summoned to have comprehensive hearing.
Commission directs:
(CIC/SA/A/2014/000546 to 549) Page 5
12. All cases have been heard together on 19.2.2015. Appellant is not present, claiming she was going to Patna for Darshan of birth place of 10 th Guru, which was taken note by the Commission. After appellant filed a representation to adjourn the hearing, which was rejected.
13. The officers representing respondents, submitted before the Commission that appellant Ms. Harjeet Kaur was a discontinued adhoc employee of the Punjabi Academy. On 6th October 2003 she had been appointed as Project Officer on consolidated remuneration of Rs 8000/ for work related to Theatre Reportary. Her initial appointment was for 89 days which was further renewed from time to time. She was looking after the execution/ production of plays and was working under RPO of the academy. It was alleged that she misbehaved with the RPO against which the matter was taken to the Vice Chairman on whose recommendation she had been given a chance by giving another term. It was alleged that on 22 nd July 2013 also she had misbehaved with the Secretary in presence of the Dy Secretary. In the meantime it was also brought to their notice that although she was a full time contractual employee, she used to attend the academy work only in the afternoon every day and that during office hours she was attending another private job of voicing and announcements in various media channels with remuneration. After these allegations of late coming to office, double employment and misbehavior, the Academy did not renew her contract after 2013. From 6.10.2003 to 30.6.2013, in all, she worked for 10 years in the academy with separate contract appointments.
(CIC/SA/A/2014/000546 to 549) Page 6
14. They have also shown an extract of the noting from the concerned file wherein the Secretary of the Punjabi Academy has recorded as under:
"I had been watching her performance for the last few months. She is not able to perform as per requirements of the Academy. Moreover, she is giving a little time to her work, which is hindrance to the smooth running of the Theatre Scheme for which she was appointed. So she be relieved from her duty w.e.f. 30613 and her work may be assigned to AS(C) till the new arrangements are made."
15. The officer submitted, since then she started making various complaints, allegations, representations and RTI applications against the Punjabi Academy. She went on making several kinds of allegations ranging from tampering of records of ex employees to administrative and financial irregularities. In response to flood of complaints choking the administration, the department decided to conduct inquiry on her complaints. The Department has constituted an Inquiry Committee. On 27.3.2014 committee gave its final report with detailed observations on all issues raised by her in her multiple complaints and representations. The Committee after examining found all her allegations baseless.
16. The respondent officer also submitted that there were more than 20 RTI applications from her. They were frivolous and vexatious meant only to harass the office and officers for denying her yet another chance to work every year. Yet the officers submitted that they were furnishing information to each and every RTI request.
17. The officer complained that she was filing fresh RTI applications out of the information furnished, without any end. Most of the questions are repetitive while some are with slight changes here and there. Her multiple (CIC/SA/A/2014/000546 to 549) Page 7 RTI requests are only intended to harass the officials of the Art and Cultural Department and Punjabi Academy.
18. Officers submitted: 'Because of the troubles she created by baseless allegations and purposeless RTI applications, the entire staff is engaged with her questions only and, they were not in a position to attend any other work. Most of their time we are engaged in compiling voluminous information to respond to her RTI applications. Her RTI applications are vexatious and harassing. She was abusing the RTI Act with a motive to bring pressure on the Punjabi Academy to take her back on contract basis'.
19. Officers have repeatedly prayed the Commission to give them relief from this appellant's harassment and allow her to function normally.
20. The Commission observed that the applicant has no public interest or concern in seeking the information. The Commission finds personal vengeance and grudge against the respondents for not continuing her in contractual employment as the sole purpose of her RTI applications and appeals. These RTI applications in no way offer any protection to her right to continue as contractual employee. In fact, she does not have such right. In spite of inspections, furnishing of several pages of information she is not satisfied. It is impossible to satisfy her with any amount of information as she wants to be reemployed without questioning her late arrivals every day and without challenging her double employment. The Commission finds no merit in her claim that she was asking for improving the governance of the academy.
(CIC/SA/A/2014/000546 to 549) Page 8
21. This Commission also warned the appellant in most of her earlier appeals not to repeat the RTI requests. She could not explain any public purpose for her repeated RTI applications and appeals.
22. The Commission observes that this is a case of repeated misuse of RTI with selfish motive, to further her personal vengeance, without any public purpose. These kind of disgruntled elements who were punished for their indiscipline and misconduct have no right to invoke the RTI to hurl RTI requests in reckless manner.She cannot make all sorts of allegations against anyone who questioned her. Cantankerous complainants like this appellant deserves to be disqualified for the purpose of securing RTI for the genuine use by other citizen. Though the Commission could have disqualified this appellant for her reckless misuse of RTI, the Commission refrains from doing so, and warns her not to repeat any request for information which were answered finally in several second appeals.
23. The Commission directs the respondent to prepare a report on all her RTI applications with their replies and orders of this Commission along with the inquiry committee report and upload the same on website, so that office could refer all her repeated RTI applications to this.
24. All her second appeals are disposed off with the above observations and directions.
(M. Sridhar Acharyulu)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy
(CIC/SA/A/2014/000546 to 549) Page 9
(Babu Lal)
Dy. Registrar
(CIC/SA/A/2014/000546 to 549) Page 10
Address of the parties
1. The CPIO
Punjabi Academy
DDA Community Centre
Sardar Thana Road
Motia Khan
Pahar Ganj
New Delhi 110 055
2. The CPIO
Department of Art
Culture and Language
Room No.704, 7th Level
CWing, Delhi Secretariat
IP Estate
New Delhi 110 002
3. Ms.Harjit Kaur
F69, 3rd Floor
Kirti Nagar
New Delhi
(CIC/SA/A/2014/000546 to 549) Page 11