Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Naresh Kadyan vs Ministry Of Micro, Small And Medium ... on 19 September, 2022

Author: Vanaja N Sarna

Bench: Vanaja N Sarna

                          क य सच  ु ना आयोग
                   CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                            बाबा गंगनाथ माग
                           Baba Gangnath Marg
                       मु नरका, नई द ल - 110067
                       Munirka, New Delhi-110067

                                      File no.: - CIC/MMSME/A/2021/635517

In the matter of
Naresh Kadyan
                                                             ... Appellant
                                        VS
CPIO
Ministry of Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises,
PMEGP Section
Udyog Bhawan, Rafi Marg,
New Delhi - 110011
                                                             ... Respondent
RTI application filed on          :    12/05/2021
CPIO replied on                   :    25/05/2021
First appeal filed on             :    31/05/2021
First Appellate Authority order   :    15/07/2021
Second appeal filed on            :    09/08/2021
Date of Hearing                   :    19/09/2022
Date of Decision                  :    19/09/2022

The following were present:
Appellant : Not present

Respondent: Anil Kumar, Under Secretary and CPIO, present over VC Information Sought:

The Appellant has sought the following information with regard to PMEGP and MUDRA scheme:
1. Present status and action taken on grievance Nos. PRSEC/E/2021/10953:
PMOPG/E/2021/0357996: MMSME/E/2021/00477.
1

2. Provide Constitutional provisions under which margin money subsidy with own contribution, granted under PMEGP, creates discrimination among economical weaker sections of general category with reserve category.

Grounds for Second Appeal The CPIO did not provide the desired information.

Submissions made by Appellant and Respondent during Hearing:

The appellant was not present at the VC venue despite due service of notice on 13.09.2022 vide speed post acknowledgment no. ED024241995IN. The CPIO submitted that a suitable reply was given vide letter dated 25.05.2021.

Observations:

Based on a perusal of the record, it was noted that the CPIO vide letter dated 25.05.2021 replied to the appellant and stated that as per the 103rd Constitutional Amendment Act, 2019, the quota of 10% reservation for EWS talks about participation in employment in the services of the state and covers recruitment in government jobs and admissions in educational institutions only with certain conditions. The provisions contained in the Act are not applicable to PMEGP scheme. PMEGP scheme is governed by its own guidelines which has been approved by the competent authority. The FAA vide order dated 15.07.2021 concurred with the CPIO's reply. The appellant in his second appeal failed to point out any deficiency in the reply given. The Commission on examining the RTI application finds that point no. 1 was not replied to. The CPIO was asked to explain, to which he reiterated his written submissions dated 15.09.2022.

Decision:

In view of the fact that point no. 1 was not addressed in the written submissions also, the CPIO is directed to send a reply to the appellant informing him of the action taken or not taken by the department. In case grievance Nos. PRSEC/E/2021/10953: PMOPG/E/2021/0357996:
2
MMSME/E/2021/00477 were not received in their office, the same shall be intimated within 10 days from the date of receipt of the order.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly Vanaja N. Sarna (वनजा एन. सरना) Information Commissioner (सच ू ना आयु त) Authenticated true copy (अ भ मा णत स या पत त) A.K. Assija (ऐ.के. असीजा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011- 26182594 / दनांक / Date 3