Central Information Commission
Mayur Sharma vs Office Of The Chief Minister Delhi on 10 December, 2025
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
File No: Three Cases.
(1) CIC/DESUN/A/2024/634512
(2) CIC/DESUN/A/2024/634513
(3) CIC/OOCMD/C/2024/638603
Mayur Sharma .....अपीलकता/Appellant
....िशकायतकता /Complainant
VERSUS
बनाम
1. PIO,
Section Officer-(RTI Section), Delhi
Skill & Entrepreneurship University
(Govt. of NCT of Delhi), RTI Section,
D.S.E.U. Dwarka Campus, Sector-9,
Dwarka, New Delhi-110077.
2. CPIO under RTI,
Deputy Secretary & PIO, Chief
Minister's Office (GNCTD), A-315,
3rd Level, Delhi Secretariat, I.P. Estate,
New Delhi-110002 .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 08.12.2025
Date of Decision : 09.12.2025
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari
The above-mentioned second appeals are clubbed together as the parties are
common, subject-matter is similar in nature and hence are being disposed of
through a common order.
CIC/DESUN/A/2024/634512 & Ors. Page 1 of 13
(1) CIC/DESUN/A/2024/634512
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 27.05.2024
CPIO replied on : Not on record
First appeal filed on : 26.06.2024
First Appellate Authority's order : Not on record
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 10.08.2024
Information sought:
1. The Appellant/Complainant filed an (online) RTI application dated 27.05.2024 seeking the following information:
"Mr. Mayur Sharma has worked in Delhi Skill and Entrepreneurship University DSEU as a Consultant in Spoken English Project. He has resigned on 19.12.2023. He has no dues.
1. What are the pending liabilities of DSEU towards Mr. Mayur Sharma including his salary and pending Travel Allowance and other liabilities.
2. Why till date all the salary and pending Travel Allowance and other dues from DSEU to Mr. Mayur Sharma has not been cleared adjusting his notice period dues.
3. When Mr. Mayur Sharma joined DSEU as a consultant in Spoken English Project then in his offer letter and appointment letter, no where it is mentioned that after resigning experience letter, relieving letter and salary slip will not be issued. Neither it was conveyed on email or by any other means. Even Mr. Mayur Sharma has worked in DSEU as teaching Facilitator under previous VC and he was given experience letter and relieving letter. If it was made clear at the time of joining DSEU will not give any experience letter and relieving letter then he would have not even joined. On what basis and grounds DSEU deny not to issue experience letter, relieving letter and salary slip to Mr. Mayur Sharma. How any decision you can apply retrospectively.
4. What action has been taken on this matter by VC, Registrar, Administration Dept, HR Dept, Accounts Dept. and Spoken English Project till date. Give all details with name and accountability of each CIC/DESUN/A/2024/634512 & Ors. Page 2 of 13 person. Why any dept. is not replying mails and mobile no. of Mr. Mayur Sharma and instead delaying and leading to red tapism.
5. If revalidation of Spoken English Project is the excuse of DSEU then on what basis and grounds hiring was done before revalidation. Even after hiring on what basis and grounds salary of Spoken English Projects and other miscellaneous expenses are made till date.
6. Give details of each and every expense done from Spoken English Project since inception. Also give details of each and every employee hired and given additional charge in this Project. When each and every employee left or contract expired and how much notice period every employee furnished and when their dues were cleared and why and when experience letter and relieving letter was issued."
2. Having not received any response from CPIO, the Appellant/Complainant filed a First Appeal dated 26.06.2024. The FAA order is Not on record.
(2) CIC/DESUN/A/2024/634513 Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 24.05.2024 CPIO replied on : 05.06.2024 First appeal filed on : 05.06.2024 First Appellate Authority's order : 25.06.2024 2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 10.08.2024 Information sought:
3. The Appellant/Complainant filed an (online) RTI application dated 24.05.2024 seeking the following information:
"Mr. Mayur Sharma has worked in Delhi Skill and Entrepreneurship University DSEU as a Consultant in Spoken English Project. He has resigned on 19.12.2023. He has no dues.
1. What are the pending liabilities of DSEU towards Mr. Mayur Sharma including his salary and pending Travel Allowance and other liabilities.
2. Why till date all the salary and pending Travel Allowance and other dues from DSEU to Mr. Mayur Sharma has not been cleared adjusting his notice period dues.CIC/DESUN/A/2024/634512 & Ors. Page 3 of 13
3. When Mr. Mayur Sharma joined DSEU as a consultant in Spoken English Project then in his offer letter and appointment letter, no where it is mentioned that after resigning experience letter, relieving letter and salary slip will not be issued. Neither it was conveyed on email or by any other means. Even Mr. Mayur Sharma has worked in DSEU as teaching Facilitator under previous VC and he was given experience letter and relieving letter. If it was made clear at the time of joining DSEU will not give any experience letter and relieving letter then he would have not even joined. On what basis and grounds DSEU deny not to issue experience letter, relieving letter and salary slip to Mr. Mayur Sharma. How any decision you can apply retrospectively.
4. What action has been taken on this matter by VC, Registrar, Administration Dept, HR Dept, Accounts Dept. and Spoken English Project till date. Give all details with name and accountability of each person. Why any dept. is not replying mails and mobile no. of Mr. Mayur Sharma and instead delaying and leading to red tapism.
5. If revalidation of Spoken English Project is the excuse of DSEU then on what basis and grounds hiring was done before revalidation. Even after hiring on what basis and grounds salary of Spoken English Projects and other miscellaneous expenses are made till date.
6. Give details of each and every expense done from Spoken English Project since inception. Also give details of each and every employee hired and given additional charge in this Project. When each and every employee left or contract expired and how much notice period every employee furnished and when their dues were cleared and why and when experience letter and relieving letter was issued."
4. The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant/Complainant on 05.06.2024 stating as under:
"Request rejected Remarks:- The RTI has been received in duplicate from the Chief Minister office with same set of Questions/information enquiry."
5. Being dissatisfied, the Appellant/Complainant filed a First Appeal dated 05.06.2024. The FAA vide its order dated 25.06.2024, held as under .
CIC/DESUN/A/2024/634512 & Ors. Page 4 of 13"FAA has directed to CPIO to provide the required information to appellant within 21 days."
(3) CIC/OOCMD/C/2024/638603 Relevant facts emerging from complaint:
RTI application filed on : 25.05.2024 CPIO replied on : 27.05.2024 First appeal filed on : 05.06.2024 First Appellate Authority's order : 01.07.2024 2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 10.08.2024 Information sought:
6. The Complainant/Appellant filed an (online) RTI application dated 25.05.2024 to the PIO, O/O CMO, Delhi seeking the following information:
"Mr. Mayur Sharma has worked in Delhi Skill and Entrepreneurship University DSEU as a Consultant in Spoken English Project. He has resigned on 19.12.2023. He has no dues.
1. What are the pending liabilities of DSEU towards Mr. Mayur Sharma including his salary and pending Travel Allowance and other liabilities.
2. Why till date all the salary and pending Travel Allowance and other dues from DSEU to Mr. Mayur Sharma has not been cleared adjusting his notice period dues.
3. When Mr. Mayur Sharma joined DSEU as a consultant in Spoken English Project then in his offer letter and appointment letter, no where it is mentioned that after resigning experience letter, relieving letter and salary slip will not be issued. Neither it was conveyed on email or by any other means. Even Mr. Mayur Sharma has worked in DSEU as teaching Facilitator under previous VC and he was given experience letter and relieving letter. If it was made clear at the time of joining DSEU will not give any experience letter and relieving letter then he would have not even joined. On what basis and grounds DSEU deny not to issue experience letter, relieving letter and salary slip to Mr. Mayur Sharma. How any decision you can apply retrospectively.CIC/DESUN/A/2024/634512 & Ors. Page 5 of 13
4. What action has been taken on this matter by VC, Registrar, Administration Dept, HR Dept, Accounts Dept. and Spoken English Project till date. Give all details with name and accountability of each person. Why any dept. is not replying mails and mobile no. of Mr. Mayur Sharma and instead delaying and leading to red tapism.
5. If revalidation of Spoken English Project is the excuse of DSEU then on what basis and grounds hiring was done before revalidation. Even after hiring on what basis and grounds salary of Spoken English Projects and other miscellaneous expenses are made till date.
6. Give details of each and every expense done from Spoken English Project since inception. Also give details of each and every employee hired and given additional charge in this Project. When each and every employee left or contract expired and how much notice period every employee furnished and when their dues were cleared and why and when experience letter and relieving letter was issued."
7. The PIO, CMO, Delhi furnished a reply to the Complainant/Appellant on 27.05.2024 stating as under:
"REQUEST TRANSFERRED TO OTHER PUBLIC AUTHORITY"
8. Being dissatisfied, the Complainant/Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 05.06.2024. The FAA vide its order dated 01.07.2024, held as under.
"1. I have gone through the records. It is observed that PIO, CM Office on 27.05.2024 had transferred on-line RTI application to PIO, Delhi Skill and Entrepreneurship University under section 6(3) of RTI Act, 2005 as the queries related to that department.
2. Section 6(3) of RTI Act, 2005 states that public-authority, which is not concerned with the requested information, shall transfer the application to such other public authority which hold the information or to the authority to which the subject matter is more closely connected. As such, PIO has responded in accordance with provisions of RTI Act, 2005.
3. The appellant may, if so desire, file first appeal directly with transferee department/s in case of 'Nil' or unsatisfactory response as the information rests with transferee Department.CIC/DESUN/A/2024/634512 & Ors. Page 6 of 13
4. No further intervention is required by First Appellate Authority, CM Office. Appeal is disposed of accordingly."
9. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, Appellant/Complainant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeals and Complaint. Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
The following were present: -
Appellant/Complainant: Absent.
Respondent: Ms. Bindu Nair, DR/CPIO along with Shri Jatin Verma, Asst. Professor/ the then CPIO and Shri Dushyant Kumar, Assistant, DSEU, Delhi all present in person.
10. Proof of having served a copy of Second Appeal on Respondent while filing the same in CIC on 10.08.2024 is not available on record. The Respondent confirmed non-service.
11. Appellant remained absent during hearing despite prior intimation.
12. A reply dated 28.08.2024 filed by CPIO, DSEU in each case is taken on record. Contents of the same (case File No. wise) are reproduced below for ready reference:
In case File No. CIC/DESUN/A/2024/634512.
"Q1: What are the pending liabilities of DSEU towards Mr. Mayur Sharma, including his salary, pending Travel Allowance, and other liabilities? Reply: The grievant has been informed of the pending liabilities via letter no. F.No. 21(1)/SEP/DSEU/2022/1418 dated 23/01/2024. A copy has been attached herewith.
Q2: Why has DSEU not cleared all the salary, pending Travel Allowance, and other dues owed to Mr. Mayur Sharma to date. including adjusting his notice period dues?
Reply: This question seeks a justification rather than specific records or documents. As per the decision in the Dr. Celsa Pinto case, such explanations are outside the scope of information' under the RTI Act. Q3: When Mr. Mayur Sharma joined DSEU as a consultant in the Spoken English Project, there was no mention in his offer letter or appointment letter that experience, relieving letters, and salary slips would not be issued after CIC/DESUN/A/2024/634512 & Ors. Page 7 of 13 resignation. Why has DSEU denied issuing these documents? On what basis is this decision applied retrospectively?
Reply: The request seeks an explanation for the non-issuance of documents, which does not qualify as 'information' under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act. Relevant records should be consulted for clarity.
Q4: What actions have been taken by the VC, Registrar, Administration Dept. HR Dept, Accounts Dept, and Spoken English Project till date? Provide details with names and accountability each person. Why are departments not responding to Mr. Mayur Sharma's communications, leading to delays and red tape? Reply: This request for specific actions and reasons involves justifications rather than documented information. The RTI Act does not cover such explanations. Q5: If revalidation of the Spoken English Project is the excuse, on what basis was hiring done before revalidation? On what basis are the salaries and miscellaneous expenses for the Spoken English Project being made to date? Reply: The query seeks explanations for financial and procedural decisions rather than specific records. These justifications are not covered under the RTI Act. Q6: Provide details of each expense incurred from the Spoken English Project since its inception. Include details of each employee hired, their additional charges, contract expirations, notice periods, clearance of dues, and issuance of experience and relieving letters.
Reply: The requested information pertains to personal details of employees, which falls under the exemption clause 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. Therefore, this information cannot be provided."
In case File No. CIC/DESUN/A/2024/634513.
"Q1: What are the pending liabilities of DSEU towards Mr. Mayur Sharma, including his salary, pending Travel Allowance, and other liabilities? Reply: The grievant has been informed of the pending liabilities via letter no. F.No. 21(1)/SEP/DSEU/2022/1418 dated 23/01/2024. A copy has been attached herewith.
Q2: Why has DSEU not cleared all the salary, pending Travel Allowance, and other dues owed to Mr. Mayur Sharma to date. including adjusting his notice period dues?
Reply: This question seeks a justification rather than specific records or documents. As per the decision in the Dr. Celsa Pinto case, such explanations are outside the scope of 'information' under the RTI Act.CIC/DESUN/A/2024/634512 & Ors. Page 8 of 13
Q3: When Mr. Mayur Sharma joined DSEU as a consultant in the Spoken English Project, there was no mention in his offer letter or appointment letter that experience, relieving letters, and salary slips would not be issued after resignation. Why has DSEU denied issuing these documents? On what basis is this decision applied retrospectively?
Reply: The request seeks an explanation for the non-issuance of documents, which does not qualify as 'information' under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act. Relevant records should be consulted for clarity.
Q4: What actions have been taken by the VC, Registrar, Administration Dept, HR Dept, Accounts Dept, and Spoken English Project till date? Provide details with names and accountability of each person. Why are departments not responding to Mr. Mayur Sharma's communications, leading to delays and red tape? Reply: This request for specific actions and reasons involves justifications rather than documented information. The RTI Act does not cover such explanations. Q5: If revalidation of the Spoken English Project is the excuse, on what basis was hiring done before revalidation? On what basis are the salaries and miscellaneous expenses for the Spoken English Project being made to date? Reply: The query seeks explanations for financial and procedural decisions rather than specific records. These justifications are not covered under the RTI Act. Q6: Provide details of each expense incurred from the Spoken English Project since its inception. Include details of each employee hired, their additional charges, contract expirations, notice periods, clearance of dues, and issuance of experience and relieving letters.
Reply: The requested information pertains to personal details of employees, which falls under the exemption clause 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. Therefore, this information cannot be provided."
In case File No. CIC/OOCMD/C/2024/638603.
"Q1: What are the pending liabilities of DSEU towards Mr. Mayur Sharma, including his salary, pending Travel Allowance, and other liabilities? Reply: The grievant has been informed of the pending liabilities via letter no. F. No. 21(1)/SEP/DSEU/2022/1418 dated 23/01/2024. A copy has been attached herewith.
Q2: Why has DSEU not cleared all the salary, pending Travel Allowance, and other dues owed to Mr. Mayur Sharma to date. including adjusting his notice period dues?CIC/DESUN/A/2024/634512 & Ors. Page 9 of 13
Reply: This question seeks a justification rather than specific records or documents. As per the decision in the Dr. Celsa Pinto case, such explanations are outside the scope of information' under the RTI Act.
Q3: When Mr. Mayur Sharma joined DSEU as a consultant in the Spoken English Project, there was no mention in his offer letter or appointment letter that experience, relieving letters, and salary slips would not be issued after resignation. Why has DSEU denied issuing these documents? On what basis is this decision applied retrospectively?
Reply: The request seeks an explanation for the non-issuance of documents, which does not qualify as 'information' under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act. Relevant records should be consulted for clarity.
Q4: What actions have been taken by the VC, Registrar, Administration Dept. HR Dept, Accounts Dept, and Spoken English Project till date? Provide details with names and accountability of each person. Why are departments not responding to Mr. Mayur Sharma's communications, leading to delays and red tape? Reply: This request for specific actions and reasons involves justifications rather than documented information. The RTI Act does not cover such explanations. Q5: If revalidation of the Spoken English Project is the excuse, on what basis was hiring done before revalidation? On what basis are the salaries and miscellaneous expenses for the Spoken English Project being made to date? Reply. The query seeks explanations for financial and procedural decisions rather than specific records. These justifications are not covered under the RTI Act. Q6: Provide details of each expense incurred from the Spoken English Project since its inception. Include details of each employee hired, their additional charges, contract expirations, notice periods, clearance of dues, and issuance of experience and relieving letters.
Reply: The requested information pertains to personal details of employees, which falls under the exemption clause 8(1)(1) of the RTI Act. Therefore, this information cannot be provided."
13. Ms. Bindu Nair, present CPIO summed up her arguments by stating that point-wise reply along with relevant information including relieving letter, experience certificate and other related information as sought by the Appellant has already been provided to him vide online reply dated 28.08.2024. She further tendered her apology for delayed response by pleading that it was unintentional and may be condoned in the interest of CIC/DESUN/A/2024/634512 & Ors. Page 10 of 13 justice. She apprised the Bench that the core grievance of the Appellant is non- clearance of his dues/benefits on resignation from the post of Consultant of the Spoken English Project. Ms. Bindu Nair, CPIO clarified firstly that Appellant/ Complainant was engaged on contractual basis, which mandated one month's prior notice before termination of the contract as specified in his offer of appointment. He was not getting salary and instead he, being a contractual worker, was paid a fixed amount by their organization. Since he resigned without serving prior notice for one month, a deduction of 18 days' pay has been made from his account. However, as on date the issue has been resolved. Decision:
14. The Commission at the outset observes from a perusal of records that that the core issue raised in the instant matters is not as much as about seeking access to information per se rather it is about redressal of Appellant's grievance regarding non-receipt of benefits, clearance certificate and experience certificate after resignation.
15. From the standpoint of RTI Act, the replies of the CPIO are in spirit of RTI Act, merits of which cannot be called into question.
16. For better understating of the mandate of RTI Act, the Appellant/Complainant shall note that outstretching the interpretation of Section 2(f) of the RTI Act to include deductions and inferences to be drawn by the CPIO is unwarranted as it casts immense pressure on the CPIOs to ensure that they provide the correct deduction/inference to avoid being subject to penal provisions under the RTI Act.
17. His attention is also drawn towards a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court on the scope and ambit of Section 2(f) of RTI Act in the matter of CBSE vs. Aditya Bandopadhyay & Ors. [CIVIL APPEAL NO.6454 of 2011] wherein it was held as under:
"35. At this juncture, it is necessary to clear some misconceptions about the RTI Act. The RTI Act provides access to all information that is available and existing.........A public authority is also not required to furnish information which require drawing of inferences and/or making of assumptions. It is also not required to provide `advice' or `opinion' to an applicant, nor required to obtain and furnish any `opinion' or `advice' to an applicant. The reference to `opinion' or `advice' in the definition of CIC/DESUN/A/2024/634512 & Ors. Page 11 of 13 `information' in section 2(f) of the Act, only refers to such material available in the records of the public authority. Many public authorities have, as a public relation exercise, provide advice, guidance and opinion to the citizens. But that is purely voluntary and should not be confused with any obligation under the RTI Act." (Emphasis Supplied)
18. As far as jurisdiction of Commission is concerned, a reference may be had of a judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the matter of Hansi Rawat and Anr. v. Punjab National Bank and Ors. (LPA No.785/2012) dated 11.01.2013 wherein it has been held as under:
"6. The proceedings under the RTI Act do not entail detailed adjudication of the said aspects. The dispute relating to dismissal of the appellant No.2 LPA No.785/2012 from the employment of the respondent Bank is admittedly pending consideration before the appropriate fora. The purport of the RTI Act is to enable the appellants to effectively pursue the said dispute. The question, as to what inference if any is to be drawn from the response of the PIO of the respondent Bank to the RTI application of the appellants, is to be drawn in the said proceedings and as aforesaid the proceedings under the RTI Act cannot be converted into proceedings for adjudication of disputes as to the correctness of the information furnished."(Emphasis Supplied).
19. The aforesaid rationale finds resonance in another judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the matter of Govt. of NCT of Delhi vs. Rajender Prasad (W.P.[C] 10676/2016) dated 30.11.2017 wherein it was held as under: "6. The CIC has been constituted under Section 12 of the Act and the powers of CIC are delineated under the Act. The CIC being a statutory body has to act strictly within the confines of the Act and is neither required to nor has the jurisdiction to examine any other controversy or disputes."
20. While, the Apex Court in the matter of Union of India vs Namit Sharma (Review Petition [C] No.2309 of 2012) dated 03.09.2013 observed as under:
"20. ...While deciding whether a citizen should or should not get a particular information "which is held by or under the control of any public authority", the Information Commission does not decide a dispute between two or CIC/DESUN/A/2024/634512 & Ors. Page 12 of 13 more parties concerning their legal rights other than their right to get information in possession of a public authority...." (Emphasis Supplied)
21. Having observed as above, no relief can be granted in these matters and submissions of the Respondents are upheld.
The appeals are disposed of accordingly.
Vinod Kumar Tiwari (िवनोद कुमार ितवारी) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स"ािपत ित) (S. Anantharaman) Dy. Registrar 011- 26181927 Date Copy To:
The FAA, Delhi Skill and Entrepreneurship University, Integrated Institute of Technology Complex, Sector 9, Dwarka, New Delhi - 110077 CIC/DESUN/A/2024/634512 & Ors. Page 13 of 13 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)