Central Information Commission
Rajender Kumar Sharma vs Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan on 30 September, 2024
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/KVSAN/A/2023/651847
Rajender Kumar Sharma ... अपीलकता /Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO:
Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan, ... ितवादीगण/Respondents
New Delhi
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:
RTI : 15.09.2023 FA : 30.10.2023 SA : Nil
CPIO : 17.10.2023 FAO : 10.11.2023 Hearing : 18.09.2024
Date of Decision: 27.09.2024
CORAM:
Hon'ble Commissioner
_ANANDI RAMALINGAM
ORDER
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 15.09.2023 seeking information on the following points:
(i) Please inform me the Status of my request letter dated 25.08.2023 send at email id [email protected] copy attached for ready reference
(ii) Please provide me photocopy of Noting and correspondence papers of concern KVS file, wherein my request dated 25.08.23 dealt by KVS HQ
(iii) Please provide me the numbers or count of absorbed pensioners who after technical resignation are getting monthly pension with DR from KVS HQ, as on date Page 1 of 4
(iv) Please inform me the present position of pending issue relating to release of DR on Monthly Pension to pensioners who are getting pension from KVS HQ after absorption in other Central State Autonomous bodies of Govt. of India.
2. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 17.10.2023 and the same is reproduced as under:-
i. The request letter dated 25.08.2023 has been disposed off. Copy is enclosed for your information.
ii. The required information desired by the applicant is attached with the letter. iii. The information desired by the applicant is not available in this office.
Any information under Section 7(9) of the RTI Act, 2005 will generally be provided in the form in which it is sought, unless it would disproportionately abuse the resources of the public authority or jeopardize the security of the record concerned or should not be harmful for conservation. Therefore, the information cannot be made available.
iv. The matter has been referred to the concerned Ministry, Directions/orders from the Ministry in this regard are still awaited.
3. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 30.10.2023 alleging that the information provided was incomplete, false and misleading. The FAA vide order dated 10.11.2023 upheld the reply given by the CPIO.
4. Aggrieved with the FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated Nil.
5. The appellant and on behalf of the respondent Mr. O.S Sheran, Assistant Commissioner and Mr. Raj Kumar Shukla, Section Officer, attended the hearing in person.
6. The appellant inter alia submitted that the reply furnished by the CPIO on points no. 1 & 2 were not in accordance with the information sought in the RTI application. Moreover, the correct enclosures were not furnished by the respondent. He requested the Commission to direct the respondent to furnish the information on the above mentioned points.
Page 2 of 47. The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that a response to the RTI application in accordance with the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005, had already been furnished to the appellant vide their letter dated 17.10.2023. He further submitted that the information sought on point no. 2 of the RTI application included name of third-party, hence, the same was not provided to the appellant.
8. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both parties and perusal of records, observes that the RTI application was replied by the CPIO on 17.10.2023. The Commission notes that incomplete information has been provided by the CPIO on point no. 1 of the RTI application. Further, the Commission observes that the information sought on point no. 2 of the RTI application includes name of third party. Therefore, the Commission directs the respondent to furnish a revised reply against point no. 1 and 2 of the RTI application, after redacting third party information, as per section 10 of the RTI Act, to the appellant, within 20 days from the date of the receipt of this order, under intimation to the Commission. With these observation and direction, the appeal is disposed of.
Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
Sd/-
आनंदी राम लंगम)
(Anandi Ramalingam) (आनं म
सूचना आयु )
Information Commissioner (सू
दनांक/Date: 27.09.2024
Authenticated true copy
Col S S Chhikara (Retd) कन ल एस एस िछकारा, ( रटायड )
Dy. Registrar (उप पंजीयक)
011-26180514
Page 3 of 4
Addresses of the parties:
1. The CPIO
Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan,
CPIO, RTI Branch,
H.Q., 18, Institutional Area, Shaheed Jeet Singh Marg, New Delhi-110016
2. Rajender Kumar Sharma Page 4 of 4 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)