Laxman Bhimbhau Panmand vs Nuclear Power Corporation Of India on 12 August, 2024

[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Laxman Bhimbhau Panmand vs Nuclear Power Corporation Of India on 12 August, 2024

Bench: Heeralal Samariya

                                      के न्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
                             Central Information Commission
                                  बाबा गंगनाथ मागग, मुननरका
                             Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                              नई दिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067

नितीय अपील संख्या / Second Appeal No. CIC/NPCOI/A/2023/622443
Shri Laxman Bhimbhau Panmand                                      ... अपीलकताग/Appellant
                                     VERSUS/बनाम
PIO, Nuclear Power Corporation of India                       ...प्रनतवािीगण /Respondent

Date of Hearing                           :   01.08.2024
Date of Decision                          :   07.08.2024
Chief Information Commissioner            :   Shri Heeralal Samariya

Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on          :            21.11.2022
PIO replied on                    :            22.12.2022
First Appeal filed on             :            16.01.2023
First Appellate Order on          :            06.02.2023
2ndAppeal/complaint received on   :            06.05.2023
Information sought

and background of the case:

The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 21.11.2022 seeking information on the following points:-

1. "Certified copy of noting approved by the Competent Authority in pursuance of Office Memorandum No. 11013/2/2014 Estt (A.III) dated 27th November 2014 issued by the Department of Personnel & Training, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, Govt. of India for alignment of NPCIL service rules with SHWW (PPR) Act/Rules.

2. Certified copy of order endorsing Office Memorandum No. F.No. 11013/2/2014-

Estt (A-III) dated 16th July 2015 on the subject titled "Steps for Conduct of Inquiry in Complaints of Sexual Harassment" issued by the Department of Personnel & Training, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, Govt. of India.

3. Certified copy of noting approved by the Competent Authority for engagement of Shri N. Madhusudanan, DGM (HR) for availing his services after retirement from NPCIL.

4. Certified copy of "Practical Guide to Disciplinary proceedings in NPCIL" released by the Director (HR) in the month of May 2017.

5. Certified copy of noting approved by the Competent Authority for imposing penalty dated 2 February 2018 on Shri L.B. Panmand, Sr. Manager (HR) (Retd.), Emp. No. 9137018.

6. Certified copy of noting approved by the Competent Authority for implementation of the order passed by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in WP No. 9445 of 2019."

Page 1 of 3

The CPIO, Nuclear Power Corporation of India, Mumbai vide letter dated 22.12.2022 replied as under:-

1. "In this regard, it is informed that no such information is available in NPCIL. Hence, the same cannot be furnished.

2. In this regard, it is informed that no such information is available in NPCIL. Hence, the same cannot be furnished.

3. In this regard, a copy of notings is attached as Annexure - I.

4. In this regard, it is informed by AGM(HR-P) that no such information is available in NPCIL.

5. In this regard, Note No.4/N to 10/N are attached as Annexure - II (07 pages).

6. In this regard, Note No.1/N to 11/N are attached as Annexure - III (11 pages)."

Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 16.01.2023. The FAA vide order dated 06.02.2023 upheld the reply of CPIO.

Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.

Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:

A written submission has been received from the Appellant expressing his dissatisfaction on not receiving information with respect to the points 1, 3 and 4 and incomplete information on point 6 The CPIO has also submitted written submission dated 19.07.2024 reiterating and affirming the response sent.

Hearing was scheduled after giving prior notice to both the parties.

Appellant: Present through video conference Respondent: Shri B K Sinha - CPIO, NPCL was present through video conference during hearing.

The Appellant contended that he was not satisfied with the reply sent by the Respondent particularly with respect to the points 1, 3 and 4 and point 6. Respondent present during hearing stated that information available on record had been duly furnished to the Appellant, in terms of the provisions of the RTI Act.

Decision Upon perusal of records of the case and hearing averments of the parties, it is noted that point wise reply including information available on record with the public authority as defined under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act has been duly furnished to the Appellant, in terms of the provisions of the RTI Act. Since appropriate information in terms of provisions of the RTI Act has already been provided by the Respondent, no further intervention is warranted.

The appeal is disposed off accordingly.

Heeralal Samariya (हीरालाल सामररया) Chief Information Commissioner (मुख्य सूचना आयुक्त) Page 2 of 3 Authenticated true copy (अनिप्रमानणत सत्यानपत प्रनत) S. K. Chitkara (एस. के . नचटकारा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26186535 Page 3 of 3 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-

Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Central Information Commission