Central Information Commission
Mrv K Kataria vs Ministry Of Culture on 4 September, 2015
Central Information Commission, New Delhi
File No. CIC/SH/A/2014/001722
Right to Information Act2005Under Section (19)
Date of hearing : 4th September 2015
Date of decision : 4th September 2015
Name of the Appellant : Shri Vinod Kumar Kataria,
Centre for Cultural Resources and Training
(CCRT), Plot No. 15A, Sector7, Dwarka,
New Delhi 110075
Name of the Public Authority : Central Public Information Officer,
Centre for Cultural Resources and Training
(CCRT),
15A, Sector7, Dwarka, New Delhi 110075,
Central Public Information Officer,
Indira Gandhi National Centre for the Arts,
Janpath, New Delhi 110 001,
Central Public Information Officer,
Sangeet Natak Akademi,
Rabindra Bhawan, Ferozeshah Road,
New Delhi110001
The Appellant was present in person.
On behalf of the Respondents, the following were present in person:
1. Shri Anil Kohli, CPIO, CCRT.
2. Shri Jayanta Ray, Director (Admn.), IGNCA.
3. Shri R. K. Chandna, DS (FA), Sangeet Natak Akademi.
Information Commissioner : Shri Sharat Sabharwal This matter, pertaining to four RTI applications dated 28.2.2014 and 16.4.2014, filed by the Appellant to Ministry of Culture / CCRT, the application dated 2.1.2014, filed to the IGNCA and another application dated 2.1.2014, filed to the Sangeet Natak Akademi, seeking information regarding implementation of revised pay scale after the sixth pay commission and fixation of his pay, came up today. The Appellant, who is an employee of CCRT, speaking in the context of his RTI application dated 28.2.2014, stated that the CPIO did not provide him a reply in response to point 1 (b) regarding what would be the corresponding pay band and grade pay of the pre revised scale of Rs. 745011500 under which the pre revised pay scale of Rs. 650010500 was merged. The Respondents submitted that information in response to this point was provided by the FAA vide his letter dated 16.6.2014. The Appellant stated that he is not satisfied with the information provided by the FAA. He further submitted that in his reply, the FAA stated that the corresponding pay band and grade pay shall be available only in such organizations / services, which have had a historical parity with CSS/CSSS like AFHQCS /AFHQSS/RBSS etc. However, the above is not borne out by the reply given by IGNCA to his RTI application, filed to them. The Appellant also stated that in response to point 1 (c) of his application, the Respondents provided him a copy of the relevant pages of Swami's manual and even the instructions contained therein have not been implemented by them in respect of fixation of his pay. The Appellant wanted to explain certain details of fixation of his pay during the proceedings. He was informed that the Commission was not competent to go into the issue of correctness of his pay fixation.
2. We have considered the records and the submissions made by both the parties. The Appellant has a grievance regarding fixation of his pay and has stated that the benefit due to him has not been given, even though it has been given to similarly placed employees in other organizations such as IGNCA. As stated above, the Commission is not competent to address such grievances under the RTI Act. We would advise the Respondents to address this grievance. In so far as the information sought by the Appellant is concerned, the Respondents have already provided it. In case the Appellant believes that they are not interpreting the rules concerning his pay fixation correctly, he is at liberty to raise the matter in an appropriate forum.
3. With the above observations, the appeal is disposed of.
4. Copies of this order be given free of cost to the parties.
Sd/ (Sharat Sabharwal) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against application and payment of the charges prescribed under the Act to the CPIO of this Commission.
(Vijay Bhalla) Deputy Registrar