Central Information Commission
Mr.Sushil Kumar Sharma vs Food Corporation Of India on 7 July, 2010
Central Information Commission
Room No. 5, Club Building, Near Post Office
Old J.N.U. Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel No: 26161997
Case No. CIC/SS/A/2010/000178
Name of Appellant : Sh. Sunil Kumar Sharma
Name of Respondent : Food Corporation of India
ORDER
Sh. Sushil Kumar Sharma, the Appellant, vide letter dated 4.09.2009, in which he sought information on 19 points regarding the complaint petition filed by him on 18.08.2009. The CPIO, replied vide letter dated 12.10.2009, providing point-wise information. Not satisfied with the reply, the Appellant filed an appeal before the First Appellate Authority (FAA). Not getting a satisfactory response from the Appellate Authority, the Appellant has filed the present appeal before the Commission.
The matter was heard on 16.06.2010 Sh. Sushil Kumar Sharma, the Appellant was present.
Sh. Aakash Kumar, Manager (D), FCI represented the Respondent Public Authority.
During the hearing it transpires that the Appellant had applied for medical permission for the treatment of Sh. V. K. Kaushik, a retired employee, from the office of the Respondent. This permission which, in view of the circumstances, should have been granted immediately, took a long time. As per the RTI application and the submission made of the Appellant during the hearing, the Dealing Assistant, instead of providing the necessary medical permission, made the Appellant wait while he numbered the pages of the concerned file. Since, the file consisted of many pages it took quite some time before the task was completed and the medical permission was provided to the Appellant.
Upon consideration of this matter, the Commission is of the view that the Respondent need to inform the Appellant of the action taken against the concerned officers / employees, who caused harassment to the Appellant. The Respondent are, therefore, hereby directed to provide the Appellant with the complete action taken on the complaint filed by the Appellant. The head of office of the Public Authority is also advised to evolve a suitable mechanism in the Public Authority to ensure that unnecessary harassment is not caused to retired employees on the pretext of formalities.
With these directions / observations the matter is disposed off accordingly.
(Sushma Singh) Information Commissioner 7.07.2010