Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

Sushila Devi vs Central Institute For Research On ... on 1 July, 2024

Author: Heeralal Samariya

Bench: Heeralal Samariya

                                   के न्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
                          Central Information Commission
                               बाबा गंगनाथ मार्ग, मुनिरका
                          Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                           नई दिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067

द्वितीय अपील संख्या / Second Appeal No. CIC/CIROB/A/2023/618064


Ms. Sushila Devi                                                   ... अपीलकर्ता/Appellant
                                     VERSUS/बनाम

PIO, Central Institute for Research on Buffalloes             ...प्रतिवादीगण /Respondent
(ICAR)

Date of Hearing                           :    28.06.2024
Date of Decision                          :    28.06.2024
Chief Information Commissioner            :    Shri Heeralal Samariya

Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on          :            10.02.2023
PIO replied on                    :            09.03.2023
First Appeal filed on             :            14.03.2023
First Appellate Order on          :            24.03.2023
2 Appeal/complaint received on
 nd
                                  :            Nil

Information sought

and background of the case:

The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 10.02.2023 seeking information on following points:-

"1. Please find enclosed the "Revised guidelines for hiring technical manpower on short term basis in ICAR". At Point 6 (Age limit), it is mentioned that relaxation in age limits will be as per rules. Please supply the certified copy of the rules prescribing relaxation in age limits for hiring of technical manpower on short term basis."

The CPIO, Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes (ICAR), Hisar, Haryana vide letter dated 09.03.2023 replied as under:-

Rules prescribing relaxation in age limits is available on public domain site https://documents,doptcirculars.nic.in/D2/D02est/Information%20document %20on%20grant%20of%20relaxation%20of%20upper%20age%20limitMystc pdf."

Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 14.03.2023. The FAA vide order dated 24.03.2023 upheld the reply of CPIO.

Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.

Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:

Hearing was scheduled after giving prior notice to both the parties.

Appellant: Present through video conference Respondent: Shri Abdul Majeed - Asstt. Admnv. Officer was present through video conference during hearing.

The Respondent present during hearing stated that the Appellant had been duly informed that the information sought by her is available in public domain and the relevant website was also mentioned in the PIO's reply. The Appellant admitted having received the relevant website but sought clarification with respect to contents therein.

Decision Upon perusal of records of the case and hearing averments of the parties, the Commission is of the considered opinion that the Respondent had furnished appropriate response to the Appellant, furnishing information as defined under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act. The Appellant seeks redressal of her grievance by obtaining clarifications from the Respondent. Furnishing of clarification or personal opinion of the PIO does not fall within the mandate of the RTI Act. Under these circumstances, no further adjudication is warranted in this case, under the RTI Act.

The appeal is disposed off accordingly.

Heeralal Samariya (हीरालाल सामरिया) Chief Information Commissioner (मुख्य सूचना आयुक्त) Authenticated true copy (अभिप्रमाणित सत्यापित प्रति) S. K. Chitkara (एस. के . चिटकारा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26186535 Page 2 of 2 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-

Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)