Central Information Commission
Jaydev Rath vs Nuclear Power Corporation Of India on 31 March, 2022
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं या / Second Appeal No. CIC/NPCOI/A/2020/681884
CIC/NPCOI/A/2020/128486
Shri Jaydev Rath ... अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS/बनाम
PIO, Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd. ... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Mumbai
Through: Shri S K Srivastava - AGM/HR;
Smt. Sangeeta Pakade - Sr. Manager and
Smt. Shraddha Gupta - APIO
Date of Hearing : 30.03.2022
Date of Decision : 31.03.2022
Chief Information Commissioner : Shri Y. K. Sinha
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
Since the both cases arise out of identical issue,, the appeals have been
clubbed together for hearing and disposal.
Case RTI Filed CPIO reply First appeal FAO 2nd Appeal
No. on received on
681884 16.08.2017 25.09.2017 04.10.2017 28.05.2020 17.08.2020
128486 16.08.2017 25.09.2017 04.10.2017 28.05.2020 24.09.2020
Information soughtand background of the case:
(1
1) CIC/NPCOI/A/2020/681884 (2
2) CIC/NPCOI/A/2020/128486 The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 16.08.2017 seeking information on the following 06 points:-Page 1 of 4
The CPIO/Addl. Chief Engineer (CP) vide letter dated 25.09.2017 replied as under:-
Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, PIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 04.10.2017.
04.10.2017 The FAA vide online order dated 28.05.2020 held as under:-
"Information on your you appeal is attached as Annexure--1 in respect of your promotion. Information in respect of your counterpart can not be provided under section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act."
Aggrieved and dissatisfied, dissatisfied the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
A written submission has been received from the Appellant vide letter dated 24.03.2022 seeking additional information viz. certified copy of screening Committee report dated 03.03.2016 and certified copy of status of Screening committee report as Committee constituted and approved by competent authority on 06.04.2021.Page 2 of 4
A written submission dated 28.03.2022 has been received from the PIO, NPCIL, reiterating the replies already furnished to the Appellant and adding as under:
The Respondent has also submitted a letter dated 21.06.2021 which reveals the following:
In order to ensure social distancing and prevent the spread of the pandemic, COVID-19, hearing was scheduled through video conference after giving prior notice to both the parties. Both parties are present for the hearing held through video conference and the Appellant contended that though some information has been received, he is aggrieved by denial of information with respect to queries number 5 and 6.
The Respondent averred that whatever information is available on official records and falls within the definition of the Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, has been provided to the Appellant. The Standing Screening Committee though reconstituted in April 2021, has not yet met for finalising the grant of financial upgradation under MACP. Hence, queries number 5 and 6 could not be answered conclusively.
Decision:
Upon examination of the facts of the case, it is noted that information available on record with the public authority as defined under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act has been duly disclosed to the Appellant. Unfortunately, the grievance of the Appellant about the delay in meeting of the re-constituted Committee to decide Page 3 of 4 the issue of financial upgradation under MACP scheme, cannot be addressed under the scope and ambit of the RTI Act.
Under the given circumstances, the Commission finds that no further adjudication is warranted in this case under the RTI Act.
The appeals are disposed off accordingly.
Y. K. Sinha (वाई. के . िस हा) Chief Information Commissioner (मु य सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स ािपत ित) S. K. Chitkara (एस. के. िचटकारा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26186535 Page 4 of 4