Central Information Commission
J Rajesh vs Employees State Insurance Corporation on 3 April, 2017
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
(Room No.315, B-Wing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi 110 066)
Phone: 011- 26181927 | Fax: 011- 26185088
Prof. M. Sridhar Acharyulu (Madabhushi Sridhar)
Central Information Commissioner
CIC/BS/C/2015/900136
J Rajesh v. PIO, ESIC
RTI : 10.03.2015
FAO : Nil
Second Appeal : 16.04.2015
Hearing : 15.02.2017
Complainant : present
Public authority : Mr A. Sunder, Deputy Director, ESIC
Decided on : 03.04.2017
FINAL ORDER
FACTS:
1. The appellant complained about the misuse of housekeeping contract staff for serving tea and reimbursing the same through fake bills, allowing TA claims to be allowed, etc. The CPIO, Mr. Yogananda Rao has responded to the appellant on 08.04.2015 and given a detailed note about all the frivolous RTI applications filed by the appellant.
Decision :
2. The appellant stated that he is a former employee of the ESIC, Puducherry. He also claimed that he exposed certain irregularities in the office after which he was victimised by the officers of EPFO by initiating disciplinary proceedings against him on false charges.
3. The officer representing the public authority stated that the appellant was dismissed based on a report of the disciplinary committee. The appellant challenged the termination before CAT which ordered his reinstatement. However, he resigned within a brief period of joining back.
4. Mr. A. Sunder in his response stated that inquiry proceedings have been conducted by an independent authority and through inquiry reports 7 number of charges have been proved against him. He further stated that the appellant has filed 24 RTI application containing second appeals and 17 complaints before the Commission. He also stated that before his suspension he had filed only two RTI applications before his suspension but filed 43 applications after his suspension and further 16 more after his dismissal.
5. Mr. Sunder further stated that the appellant is simply trying to perpetrate vengeance against the officers of the ESIC and has the ulterior motive to disrupt the retirement function of Shri D. Yogananda Rao, CPIO.
6. Through written submissions it was also brought to the Commission's notice that Sh J.Rajesh has filed 12 grievances on CPGRAMS portal with the name as J.Rajesh. In almost all the complaints he has leveled allegations of corruption/malpractice/deviation from guidelines against officers/officials of ESIC RO Puducherry, ESIC Headquarters, Ministry of Labour and Employment, PMO etc. The first few complaints filed by the appellant were investigated through vigilance division and substance was found in it, which was informed to the complainant also. Later on Sh J.Rajesh started filing complaints/representation against the officers who investigated or took decision on the allegations raised by him. This established that the appellant was filing the said complaints and RTI applications before this Commission in order to vent out personal vengeance against the respondent authority and its officers.
7. The CPIO submitted his written submissions along with the status report of 17 complaints and 24 second appeals filed by Mr. J. Rajesh of which 18 appeals are disposed of. The status report of grievances of the appellant produced below:
Latest Position of the Grievances filed on CPGRAMS portal by Sh. J. Rajesh Sl. Registrati Date of Reply/action taken by Date of Subject matter No. on receipt ESIC closure No. at ESIC Complaint regarding PMOPG/E The matter has been corruption /2016/0 forwarded to vigilance /malpractices by the 1 240537 13/07/16 branch for necessary 14/07/16 officers of Regional action. No action can be office ESIC, taken at PG Level.
Puducherry Taking reference of the reply received from ESIC in grievance no.
MOLBR/E/2016/0240
The matter has already
PMOPG/E 537 he has alleged
been forwarded to
2 /2016/0 15/07/16 suppuration of 19/07/16
vigilance branch HQ for
247194 material facts by
necessary action, if any
CVO/vigilance
branch and
involvement of DG.
He has requested to
revisit his case.
Taking reference of
the reply received
from ESIC in
grievance no.
MOLBR/E/2016/0240
537 &
MOLBR/E/2016/0247
194 he has alleged The matter has been
PMOPG/E CVO & DG for forwarded to vigilance
3 /2016/0 25/07/16 helping the corrupt branch for necessary 25/07/16
253823 officers. He has also action. No action can be
alleged that PMO taken PG Level.
office PG staff is not
going into the core
issue and rather
doing a postman like
job. He has
requested to act on
his complaint.
Taking reference of The matter has been
the reply received forwarded to Vigilance
PMOPG/E
from ESIC in division with a direction
4 /2016/0 29/07/16
grievance no. to conduct an
31/07/16
264591
MOLBR/E/2016/0253 investigation and take
823 & necessary action if any.
MOLBR/E/2016/0240 Further, the matter will
537 he has not be a matter of PG
requested for an branch henceforth.
appointment with PM Therefore, the
or any other honest complainant may
officer. contact Vigilance branch
for further details.
Citing his petition no. The matter has been
P/3005160287 dated forwarded to Vigilance
30/05/16 to president division with a direction
secretariat he has to conduct an
stated that there is no
investigation and take
response from the
MOLBR/E necessary action if any.
secretary to the govt. of
5 /2016/0 29/07/16 Further, the matter will 31/07/16
India of this ministry
2853 not be a matter of PG
and has leveled
charges of corruption branch henceforth.
and has prayed for Therefore, the
suitable complainant may
action/punishment to contact Vigilance branch
the corrupt officers. for further details.
Again citing his
petition no.
P/3005160287
dt.30/05/2016 to
MOLBR/E president secretariat he This is not the platform
6 /2016/0 02/08/16 has stated that no for providing 04/08/16
2884 response is received information.
therefore sought copy
of the correspondence
made by the office of
the secretary of MOL&E
He has stated that
The issue of continuance
ministry is violating
of Shri T.E.Venkatesan,
direction of CVC in
D.D. in south Zone,
the matter of
Vigilance and Shri
rotation of the officer
S.Thoulath Khan, DD
posted in sensitive
has been taken up with
post he has named Administration and the
MOLBR/E Sh.
cases are under process
7 /2016/0 02/08/16 TEVENKATESAN,DD, and action shall be
31/08/16
2887 SOUTH ZONE
taken shortly. It has
VIGILANCE & Sh. S however been informed
THOULATH KHAN,
that the acute shortage
DD and has leveled of officers and exigency
general charges of
of work, sometimes,
corruption/malpracti compel to allow the
ce against these
officer to continue but
officers such continuance is
normally not permitted
in cases where there are
complaints of corruption
etc. Complainant is
therefore requested to
make available the
cases of corruption
against these officers
and his previous
complaints on which
action has not allegedly
been taken by these
officers. We assure
immediate
inquiry/action on the
same.
Complainant had, vide
his email dated
30.05.2016, requested
to DG, CVO, ESIC and
RD, Puducherry not to
give vigilance clearance
to DD, Shri Yogananda
Rao of RO, Puducherry,
Taking reference of
which was examined by
the reply received
Vigilance and not found
from ESIC in
having substance and
grievance no.
MOLBR/E closed by Competent
MOLBR/E/2016/0288
8 /2016/0 05/08/16 Authority. As gathered 31/08/16
4 he has questioned
2962 from Vigilance, the
working of pg
complainant have been
officers of ESIC and
served with
has sought action on
Memorandum/Charge
his grievance.
Sheet in 04 cases
besides two Show Cause
Notices and therefore,
he has started such
complaints without any
evidence to different
authorities to thwart the
action against him.
Complainant has
Re-submitted the
requested for
PMOPG/D grievance already appointment with
9 /2016/0 12/08/16 filed vide no.
Honourable PM or any
31/08/16
215683 MOLBR/E/2016/0264 other honest officer to
591
seek their assistance for
alleviating corruption
from ESIC, apparently
not being satisfied with
the action taken by
ESIC. Hence, no action
on part of ESIC as his
grievances/complaints
have been examined by
vigilance in ESIC and
found to have no
substance.
The complaint is general
in nature and no specific
instance of corruption
with any evidence, has
been given. The
He has alleged that complainant had also
CVO and DG has not filed similar complaints
followed the earlier, which have been
directions of CVC in investigated /examined
PMOPG/E the matter of by vigilance and found
10 /2016/0 19/08/16 rotation of the to have no substance. 31/08/16
298053 officers posted in The complainant talks of
sensitive posts and orders of transfers
has requested for issued on 22.07.2016
strict action against and non-relieving of
these officers. officers ordered for
transfer, whereas
majority of the officers
have already been
relieved and joined at
new places.
Complainant's grievance
relates to his RTI
He has alleged that
applications for which
many officers and
remedy exists under RTI
officials of ESIC
Act itself and should not
Puducherry are
come as PG on this
PMOPG/E coming late in the
portal. However, details
11 /2016/0 22/11/16 office. He has filed 29/11/16
as provided by the
451906 an RTI application to
concerned authority i.e.
get Aadhaar based
Regional Director
Biometric attendance
Puducherry, are
and is not getting
attached. There is no
related information.
action now on part of
ESIC.
12 PMOPG/E 11/02/17 Taking reference of Your email has already 22/2/17
/2017/0 the reply received been forwarded to
083340 from ESIC in Vigilance Division Hqrs.
grievance no. However, based on your
MOLBR/E/2016/0451 request, the matter was
906, he has alleged again forwarded to
that PG branch of Vigilance Division
ESIC Headquarters is through UO note dated
not working properly 22.2.2017 for necessary
action if any. As far as
PG is concerned, the
number cannot be kept
open until investigation
by Vigilance Branch is
completed.
8. The Learned Information Commissioner, Mr. Basant Seth has already disposed of 18 second appeals of this appellant on the same subject-matter. The appellant has filed around 24 second appeals and 17 complaints of which 12 cases are posted before this Commission. The filing of such repetitive RTI applications causes unnecessary harassment to every officer in the public authority and multiplicity of proceedings which cannot be encouraged. Any repetition of RTI application or appeal on the same subject-matter will hamper the core functioning of the public authority and CIC.
9. The Commission records its admonition against the appellant after observing the background of the appellant and repetitive filing of RTI applications and second appeals; therefore advises him not to cause wastage of public time and money. The public authority has every right to reject repetitive RTI applications to facilitate RTI Act to genuine applicants.
10. The Commission directs the public authority and office of this Commission to scrutinise the applications/appeals of this appellant and reject the files in which the subject-matter is related to any of the 24 second appeals and 17 complaints filed earlier.
11. After perusal of files and written submissions of the appellant and CPIO, ESIC, the Commission finds that sufficient information has been furnished, hence, this complaint is disposed of.
Sd/-
(M. Sridhar Acharyulu) Central Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy (Dinesh Kumar) Deputy Registrar Copy of decision given to the parties free of cost.
Addresses of the parties:
1. The CPIO under RTI, Regional Office, Puducherry, ESIC, No. 178, Ansari Daraisamy Nagar, 100 Feet Road,Puducherry-605004.
2. Shri J Rajesh, 98, II Cross, II Main Road, Priyadarshini Nagar, Puducherry-605006.