Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

Sailesh Kumar Pandey vs Prime Minister'S Office on 22 August, 2022

                                के ीयसूचनाआयोग
                       Central Information Commission
                             बाबागंगनाथमाग, मुिनरका
                       Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                         नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067

ि तीय अपील सं या / Second Appeal No. CIC/PMOIN/A/2021/624649

Shri Sailesh Kumar Pandey                                     ... अपीलकता/Appellant
                                  VERSUS/बनाम

PIO                                                     ... ितवादीगण /Respondent
National Technical Research Organization

Date of Hearing                      :     18.08.2022
Date of Decision                     :     22.08.2022
Chief Information Commissioner       :     Shri Y. K. Sinha

Relevant facts emerging from appeal:

RTI application filed on              :    22.01.2021
PIO replied on                        :    09.02.2021
First Appeal filed on                 :    16.02.2021
First Appellate Order on              :    15.03.2021
2ndAppeal/complaint received on       :    18.06.2021

Information sought

and background of the case:

The Appellant filed an online RTI application dated 22.01.2021 seeking information on the following:-

The CPIO, NTRO, vide letter dated 09.02.2021 replied as under:-

under:

Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 16.02.2021.. The FAA, FAA NTRO, vide order dated 15.03.2021 stated as under:-

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

Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:

The Appellant participated in the hearing through video conference. He stated that incomplete and misleading information was provided to him since the advertisement for the post of system engineer engineer was not provided. Similarly misleading information was provided with respect to the individuals appointed to the post of observer.

The Respondent represented by Shri N C Bhuyan, CPIO, NTRO and Shri N D Sarkar, AD (R), NTRO participated in the hearing through video conference. Shri Bhuyan stated that information as per available record was provided with respect to the advertisement for the post of Observer. However, with regard to the post of System Engineer it was stated that the advertisement was a sensitive internal restricted document for limited distribution hence the same was not disclosed to the Appellant more so for the reason that their organisation is exempted from the purview of Section 24 (1) r/w the Second Schedule of the RTI Act, 2005 and no allegation of corruption or violation of human rights was justified by the Appellant.

Decision:

Keeping in view the facts of the case and the submissions made by both the parties, the Commission is of the view that an appropriate response as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 has been provided by the Respondent. Hence, no further intervention of the Commission is required in the instant matter. For redressal of his grievance, the Appellant is advised to approach an appropriate forum.

With the above observation, the instant Second Appeal stands disposed off accordingly.

Y. K. Sinha (वाई. के . िस हा) Chief Information Commissioner (मु य सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मा णत स या पत ित) S. K. Chitkara (एस. के. िचटकारा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26186535 Page 3 of 3