Central Information Commission
Amit Kumar vs Ministry Of Labour & Employment on 13 April, 2023
Author: Saroj Punhani
Bench: Saroj Punhani
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबागंगनाथमाग , मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
File No : CIC/MLABE/A/2022/106600
Amit Kumar ......अपीलकता /Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO,
O/o CHIEF LABOUR COMMISSIONER,
CENTRAL, RTI CELL,
SHRAM SHAKTI BHAWAN,
RAFI MARG, NEW DELHI-110001. .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 12/04/2023
Date of Decision : 12/04/2023
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Saroj Punhani
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 20/12/2021
CPIO replied on : 29/12/2021
First appeal filed on : 29/12/2021
First Appellate Authority order : 19/01/2022
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 05/02/2022
Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 20.12.2021 seeking the following information:1
The CPIO furnished a reply to the appellant on 29/12/2021 stating as under:
"Point No.1: Government of India revises VDA (Minimum wages) twice a year. Accordingly the month of April and October it available in public domain and website www.cic.gov.in,https.labour.gov.in.
Point No:2,3 : No information is available is this regard in this office."
Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 29.12.2021. FAA's order, dated 19.01.2022, upheld the reply of CPIO.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, the appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal on the ground of non-receipt of relevant information against points no. 2 & 3.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Present through video-conference. Respondent: Triveni, S.O. & CPIO present in person.
The CPIO at the outset tendered her unconditional apology explaining the fact that the initial reply was furnished by the then CPIO in a casual and vague manner without going through the factum of availability of records. She further added that she has the relevant records with her and agreed to share the same with the Appellant in response to points no. 2 & 3 of the RTI application.
No oral submissions as such have been tendered by the Appellant during hearing.
Decision:
At the outset, the Commission after considering the submissions of the CPIO is flabbergasted at the conduct of then CPIO in providing vague response to the 2 Appellant against points 2 and 3 of the RTI application without making efforts to ascertain the factum of availability of records of information sought. Such casual approach of the then CPIO causes unwarranted obstructions to the Appellant's right to information and is in grave violation to provisions of RTI Act. However, no penal is warranted for want of malafides on their part.
Now, considering the hearing proceedings, the present CPIO is directed to provide a revised reply at points 2 & 3 coupled with relevant information, free of cost to the Appellant as per the provisions of RTI Act.
The above said direction should be complied by the CPIO within 7 days from the date of receipt of this order under due intimation to the Commission.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Saroj Punhani (सरोजपुनहािन) हािन) Information Commissioner (सूचनाआयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स#यािपत ित) (C.A. Joseph) Dy. Registrar 011-26179548/ [email protected] सी. ए. जोसेफ, उप-पंजीयक दनांक / 3