Central Information Commission
Saroj Devi vs National Informatics Centre on 6 August, 2025
Author: Heeralal Samariya
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/NICHQ/A/2024/121132
Ms. Saroj Devi ... अपीलकताग/Appellant
VERSUS/बनाम
PIO, ...प्रनतवािीगण /Respondent
National Informatics Centre
Date of Hearing : 29.07.2025
Date of Decision : 29.07.2025
Chief Information Commissioner : Shri Heeralal Samariya
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 13.02.2024
PIO replied on : 01.03.2024
First Appeal filed on : 04.04.2024
First Appellate Order on : 16.05.2024
2 Appeal/complaint received on
nd : 25.06.2024
Information soughtand background of the case:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 13.02.2024 seeking information on following points:-
".........I had sent a complaint cum request letter on 4th January 2024 to the DG NIC and requested for investigation and action against DIO Ranbir Singh, Palamu. One month and 10 days passed but I have no information about what action NIC took on that letter.
The applicant expects the following information in this regard. Kindly furnish the information.
1. How many officers did my application go to? Please provide me the full name, designation and postal address of all those officers. (मेरा प्राथगना पत्र दकतने अनिकाररयों के पास गया? कृ पया मुझे उन सभी अनिकाररयों का पूरा नाम, पिनाम और डाक पता प्रिान करें ।)
2. Which officer is currently holding this letter? Please provide me full name, designation and postal address of that officer. (वतगमान में यह पत्र दकस अनिकारी के पास है? कृ पया मुझे उस अनिकारी का पूरा नाम, पिनाम और डाक पता प्रिान करें ।)
3. For how many years has the accused DIO (Ranbir Singh) been posted in his home District Palamu? (आरोपी डीआईओ (रणबीर ससंह) दकतने वर्षों से अपने गृह निले पलामू में पिस्थानपत हैं?) Page 1
4. Provide me the full name and complete postal address of the Department /Authority/Minister/Officer that appoints, transfer and dismisses the DIO. (मुझे डीआईओ की ननयुनि, स्थानांतरण और बर्ागस्तगी करने वाले नवभाग / प्रानिकरण / मंत्री / अनिकारी का पूरा नाम और पूरा डाक पता प्रिान करें ।)."
The CPIO, National Informatics Centre, New Delhi vide letter dated 01.03.2024 replied as under:-
"As per the information received from the custodians of information, ie (Deemed PIO) the reply of the RTI request is:-
The matter is under process It is informed that the RTI Act provides you a right with respect to review the decision as to the amount of fees charged or the form of access provided (including particulars of the Appellate Authority, time limit, process and any other forms)."
Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 04.04.2024. The FAA vide order dated 16.05.2024 stated as under:-
1) "The RTI query dated 13.02.2024 was examined in NIC Vigilance Section and in NIC Jharkhand State unit. No vigilance angle was found in the said complaint.
2) Shri Ranvir Singh, Scientist-D is posted in NIC Palamu District Centre since 2014.
3) RTI Act is not a forum for resolution of grievances and family disputes. Eliciting answers to queries, redressal of grievance, reasons for non-compliance of rules / contesting the actions of the respondent public authority are outside the purview of the Act.
4) Since the matter is sub-judice. NIC as a public authority would consider taking any further action based on the specific directions of the court.
In view of above, the appeal stands as disposed off as per the merit of this case."
Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Written submission dated 19.07.2025 has been received from the CPIO and same has been taken on record for perusal. The relevant extract whereof is as under:
Page 2 "..The point-wise response to the RTI query with information as available on record is below:
1. How many officers did my application go to please provide me the full name designation and postal address of all those officers.
Reply: The RTI query dated 13.02.2024 was examined in NIC Vigilance Section and in NIC Jharkhand State unit. No vigilance angle was found in the said complaint. The postal address of NIC HQ and NIC Jharkhand State unit is available in the NIC website https://www.nic.gov.in/ which is in public domain
2. Which officer is currently holding this letter please provide me full name designation and postal address of that officer. Reply: NIC Jharkhand State unit.
3. For how many years has the accused DIO (Ranbir Singh) been posted in his home District Palamu.
Reply: Shri Ranvir Singh, Scientist-D is posted in NIC Palamu District Centre since 2014.
4. Provide me the full name and complete postal address of the Department/Authority/Minister/Officer that appoints transfer and dismisses the DIO.
Reply: Since the matter is sub-judice, NIC as a public authority would consider taking any further action based on the specific directions of the court.
a. For the purpose of appointment, the approval of the Competent Authority may be referred to, as conveyed vide Office Order dated 19.12.2000 (Copy enclosed).
b. For the purpose of transfer, the approval of the Competent Authority may be referred to, as conveyed vide communication no.2(1)/2019-Pers/3108906 dated 27.7.2020 (Copy enclosed). c. The matter regarding the dismissal of the DIO is addressed by the Administration/Vigilance sections as the case maybe along with approval of competent authority.
The appellant is also informed that RTI Act is not a forum for resolution of Family disputes. Eliciting answers to queries, redressal of grievance, reasons for non-compliance of rules/ contesting the actions of the respondent public authority are outside the purview of the Act.
The above is submitted for your kind information in reference to CIC hearing no. CIC/NICHQ/A/2024/121132 & CIC/NICHQ/A/2024/134428 dated 03/07/2025, scheduled on 29.07.2025. at 12.05 P.M..."
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
Appellant: Present through video-conferencing.
Respondent: Mr. Swarup Dutta, CPIO/Scientist F, NIC-HQ- participated in the hearing.
Page 3 The Appellant stated that the relevant information has not been furnished to her till date. She stated that she has prayed for an action against Mr. Ranbir Singh.
The Respondent reiterated the averments made in their written submission and stated that the relevant information has been duly provided to the Appellant.
Decision:
Upon perusal of records and submissions made during hearing, it is noted that the Appellant's queries had been appropriately answered by concerned PIO. Furthermore, written submission filed by the Respondent is comprehensive and self-explanatory. Thus, information as permissible under the provisions of the RTI Act has been duly furnished to the Appellant. In the given circumstances, no further intervention of the Commission is warranted in this case under the RTI Act. The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Heeralal Samariya (हीरालाल सामररया) Chief Information Commissioner (मुख्य सूचना आयुि) Authenticated true copy (अनभप्रमानणत सत्यानपत प्रनत) S. K. Chitkara (एस. के . नचटकारा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंिीयक) 011-26186535 Page 4 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)