Central Information Commission
Mrdhanesh Chandrapandey vs Bhabha Atomic Research Centre on 23 June, 2016
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place,
New Delhi110066
F. No.CIC/RM/A/2014/902663YA
CIC/SS/A/2014/000005YA
CIC/RM/C/2014/900468YA
CIC/RM/C/2014/900362YA
CIC/RM/C/2014/900156YA
Date of Hearing : 23.06.2016
Date of Decision : 23.06.2016
Appellant/Complainant : Shri D C Pandey, Kanchipuram (T.N.)
Respondent : Bhabha Atomic Research Centre,
Kanchipuram (T.N.)
Through: Shri S.Vel Murugan, FAA
Information Commissioner : Shri Yashovardhan Azad
Since both parties are same in the above mentioned appeals/complaints, these appeals are
clubbed together for hearing and disposal to avoid multiplicity of the proceedings.
Case No. RTI filed no. CPIO reply First appeal FAA order 2nd appeal filed
filed on
2663 16.07.2013 28.08.2013 17.09.2013 17.10.2013 01.04.2014
0005 16.07.2013 30.07.2013 17.09.2013 17.10.2013 19.11.2013
0468 Date not No reply Date not No order 01.04.2014
mentioned mentioned passed
0362 Date not No reply 18.12.2013 No order 01.04.2014
mentioned passed
0156 27.12.2013 No reply Did not file No order 24.02.2014
FA passed
CIC/RM/A/2014/902663YA
CIC/SS/A/2014/000005YA
Both the aforementioned appeals arise out of the same RTI application and the cases are identical
in nature. Vide RTI application dated 16.07.2013, the applicant sought copy of all pages
ACR's/APR's between 1999 to 2005 which was responded by the CPIO's reply dated 28.08.2013,
whereby the CPIO furnished information as available on record. The appellant preferred first
appeal on 17.09.2013 but the FAA vide order dated 17.10.2013 upheld the reply of CPIO. Feeling
aggrieved the appellant approached the Commission.
The appellant states that certified copies of ACR/APAR have not been provided and even the
information provided is not complete as some of the portions have been redacted before
photocopying them. The respondent states that all available information have already been
provided, barring only some of the portions of APAR containing strategic and scientific
information.
Decision:
After hearing both parties and on perusal of record, the Commission finds that in the light of the
earlier orders of co ordinate benches of the Commission in various instances like
CIC/SM/A/2013/001328/RM and CIC/SM/A/2010/000601 & 618 and the recent decision of this
Bench in CIC/CC/A/2015/001185YA, if similar information could be provided by the
Respondent, there is no justification in denial thereof today. Accordingly, the Commission directs
that complete APAR as sought by the Appellant may be furnished to the Appellant within two
weeks of receipt of this order.
The appeals are disposed of accordingly.
CIC/RM/C/2014/900468YA
Information soughtand background of the case:
Vide an undated RTI application, the complainant sought following information:
1. Certified copy of original application submitted by Mr Indranil Mukherjee about his ATA.
2. Certified copy of all communication made between KARP/BARCF AUTHORITY to VECC authority.
Having not received any response from the public authority within stipulated time the complainant approached the Commission.
CIC/RM/C/2014/900362YA Information sought and background of the case:
Vide RTI application sought information as follows:
1. Certified copy of original application submitted by Mr Indranil Mukherjee about his transfer to VECC Kolkata.
2. Certified copy of all communication made between KARP/BARCF authority to VECC authority.
3. Certified copy of relieving letter issued to Indranil Mukherjee to Join VECC Kolkata.
CPIO did not respond to the RTI application. Aggrieved with the non response, the complainant approached the Commission.
In both the aforementioned Complaints viz. CIC/RM/C/2014/900362 and CIC/RM/C/2014/900468, the subject matters are identical and hence both are decided together by the same decision. The complainant states that CPIO and appellate authority did not respond to his request within stipulated time and reiterated his request for the information. In view of the relief sought by the applicant, it is imperative that the Complaints filed by him are converted into appeals. The respondent states information relates to 3rd party and cannot be provided u/s 8(1)(j) of RTI Act, 2005.
Decision:
After hearing parties and perusal of record, the Commission concurs with the decision of the public authority with respect to point No.1 & 2 of both the RTI applications. However, the Commission feels that copy of relieving letter as sought vide RTI application in the case number CIC/RM/C/2014/900362 does not fall under the category of exempted documents and hence the same may provided to the appellant within two weeks of receipt of this order.
The appeals are disposed of accordingly.
CIC/RM/C/2014/900156YA Information sought and background of the case:
Vide RTI application dated 27.12.2013, the complainant sought information as follows:
1. Certified copy application submitted by Mr Dilip Kumar Kar against mutual transfer with Pulak Kumar Dhara. Kolkata with file noting on it.
2. Certified copy order issued by competent authority BARCF to relieve Mr Puloa Kumar Dhara to Join VECC Kolkata
3. Certified copy of all communication made between KARP/BARCF authority to VECC authority.
Having not received any response from the public authority within stipulated time, the complainant approached the Commission.
The complainant states that his online application has not been replied till date. At the request of the Applicant, the case is being converted into an appeal for proper adjudication and disposal thereof. The respondent has denied supply of information stating that the information relates to 3rd party and cannot be provided u/s 8(1)(j) of RTI Act, 2005.
Decision:
After hearing parties and perusal of record, the Commission directs the respondent to provide copy of the mutual transfer order as sought by the appellant alongwith reason for the same. The information is directed to be provided within two weeks of receipt of this order.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
(Yashovardhan Azad) 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.
(R.P.Grover) Designated Officer Copy to: