Central Information Commission
Mr.Ashok Kakria vs Ministry Of Communications And ... on 13 July, 2011
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Room No. 308, B-Wing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi-110066
File No.CIC/LS/A/2011/000579
Appellant : Shri Ashok Kakria
Respondent : Center for Development of Advanced
Computing (CDAC), Pune
Date of Hearing : 13.7.2011
Date of Decision : 13.7.2011
FACTS :
Heard today dated 13.7.2011. Appellant not present. CDAC is represented by Shri Srinivas Pownikar, CPIO and Shri Mohal Lal, Sr Finance Officer. They are heard.
2. The matter, in short, is that vide RTI application dated 21.5.2010, the appellant had sought the following information from the CPIO :-
"(i) List of jobs/works for which EMD was submitted and the jobs/works were not awarded to CDAC: The information may be supplied in the format enclosed as Annexure-I;
(ii) List of jobs/works for which EMD was submitted and the jobs/works were awarded to CDAC, but CDAC could not take up the jobs/works and the EMD was forfeited. The information may be supplied in the format enclosed as Annexure-II; &
(iii) List of jobs/works for which EMD was submitted and the jobs/works were awarded to CDAC, but CDAC could not complete the jobs/works and the EMD was forfeited. The information may be supplied in the format enclosed as Annexure-III."
3. This was responded to by CPIO vide letter dated 23.6.2010. On appeal, the AA had passed an order dated 16.8.2010. Dissatisfied with the above orders, the appellant has filed the present appeal wherein he has adduced the following grounds :-
"(i) that EMD deposited by the CDAC with the Punjab School Education after it was awarded the work, was forfeited or not;
(ii) and if it was forfeited, whether it was required to be disclosed in Annexure-III attached by the applicant with his application dated 21.5.2010 under the RTI Act; and
(iii) whether the information has been hidden from disclosure by the CPIO; and
(iv) whether the decision of the appellate authority on the first appeal of the applicant is correct and genuine; and if not, suitable action is taken by the CIC so that my right as a citizen of India under this Act is safeguarded and also whether he was justified in writing such an absurd language as he has written in Para 4 of his letter dated 16.8.2010 (Annexure-IV)."
4. During the hearing, Shri Pownikar submits a written representation which is taken on record. It contains para-wise response to the queries raised by the appellant. In the premises, it is ordered that a copy of this representation may be sent to the appellant. It is hoped that this will satisfy him. In case he wishes to seek any additional information, he is advised to take up the matter with Shri Pownikar on Telephone No 020-25704237.
Sd/-
(M.L. Sharma) Central 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.
(K.L. Das) Deputy Registrar Address of parties :-
1. Shri Srinivas Pownikar CPIO, Center for Development Of Advanced Computing (CDAC), Pune University Campus, Pune-411007
2. Shri Ashok Kakria H-413, Phase-I, Mohali-160055