Central Information Commission
Amit Kumar Singh vs Department Of Rural Development on 5 March, 2021
Author: Vanaja N Sarna
Bench: Vanaja N Sarna
क य सच ु ना आयोग
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
बाबा गंगनाथ माग
Baba Gangnath Marg
मु नरका, नई द ल - 110067
Munirka, New Delhi-110067
File No.: - CIC/RURAL/A/2019/112582
In the matter of:
Amit Kumar Singh
... Appellant
VS
CPIO / Under Secretary
Ministry of Rural Development (MoRD),
Department of Rural Development, Rural Skills Division,
7th floor, NDCC-II Building, Jai Singh Road,
New Delhi - 110001
...Respondent
RTI application filed on : 01/09/2018 CPIO replied on : 13/09/2018, 10/12/2018 First appeal filed on : 12/10/2018 First Appellate Authority order : 05/12/2018 Second Appeal Filed on : 10/03/2019 Date of Hearing : 04/03/2021 Date of Decision : 04/03/2021 The following were present:
Appellant: Not present Respondent: Shri Bhim Prakash, Under Secretary & CPIO present over intra VC Information Sought:
The appellant has sought the following information pertaining to implementation of Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Grameen Kaushalya Yojana (DDU- GKY):
1. Whether the State government by virtue of being an action plan state can implement DDU GKY schemes by introducing changes with respect to 1 some or any of the policy and financial matters of DDY GKY schemes guidelines, notified SOPs or notified notifications.
2. Provide the list of key policy and financial matters of DDU-GKY, modification of which require a prior approval from MoRD or any of its competent authority or empowered committee of NRLM for DDU-GKY.
3. Whether a State government on its own and without any prior approval from MoRD or any of its competent authority or Empowered Committee of NRLM for DDU-GKY, can change the DDU-GKY fund disbursement instalment ratios of 25:50:25:15 and design its own instalment bifurcation ratio plan.
4. And other related information.
Grounds for Second Appeal The CPIO did not provide the requisite information.
Submissions made by Appellant and Respondent during Hearing:
The appellant was not present to plead his case despite service of hearing notice on 22.02.2021 vide speed post acknowledgment no. ED656593955IN.
The CPIO submitted that in compliance with the FAA's order, all the available information was provided to the appellant on 10.12.2018.
Observations:
From a perusal of the relevant case records, it is noted that in compliance with the FAA's order, some additional information was provided to the appellant on 10.12.2018. The Commission does not find any flaw in the said reply. Hence, no further relief can be given, moreso, when the appellant himself was not present to plead his case.
Decision:
In view of the above, the Commission upholds the reply of the CPIO and does not find any scope for further intervention in the matter.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Vanaja N. Sarna (वनजा एन. सरना) Information Commissioner (सच ू ना आय! ु त) 2 Authenticated true copy (अ भ मा णत स या पत त) A.K. Assija (ऐ.के. असीजा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011- 26182594 / दनांक / Date 3