Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

Dinesh Singh vs Maulana Azad Institute Of Dental ... on 13 November, 2019

                                  के न्द्रीयसूचनाआयोग
                       Central Information Commission
                               बाबागंगनाथमागग,मुननरका
                        Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                         नईददल्ली, New Delhi - 110067

 नितीय अपील संख्या / Second Appeal No. CIC/MAIDS/A/2018/614070

Shri Dinesh Singh                                        ... अपीलकताग/Appellant
                                  VERSUS/बनाम

PIO/Maulana Azad Ins. Of Dental                          ...प्रनतवादीगण /Respondent
Science, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg,
New Delhi

Date of Hearing                        :    11.11.2019
Date of Decision                       :    11.11.2019

Information Commissioner          :         Shri Y. K. Sinha
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:

RTI application filed on                :   21.01.2018
PIO replied on                          :   12.02.2018
First Appeal filed on                   :   20.02.2018
First Appellate Order on                :   10.03.2018
2ndAppeal/complaint received on         :   Nil

Information sought

and background of the case:

The Appellant filed RTI application dated 21.01.2018 seeking information on 5 points;

1. From which date Delhi Govt. applied 7 th Pay Commission?

2. Did MAIDS have dispatch the arrears to all its employees?

3. Do MAIDS JRs and SRs are eligible for 7 th Pay Commission who did work in MAIDS after the January 2016. If not, please then please give the effective information, why so?

4. List of MAIDS JRs who did not get their arrears regarding 7th Pay Commission so far.

5. When will MAIDS JRs get their arrears?

PIO/MAIDS, vide letter dated 12.02.2018 furnished a point wise reply to the Appellant.

Dissatisfied with the reply received from the PIO, Appellant filed First Appeal dated 20.02.2018. FAA vide order dated 10.03.2018 upheld the reply of PIO.

Feeling aggrieved as dissatisfied, Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.

Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:

Respondent is present and heard. The Appellant is absent despite advance notice for hearing. The PIO placed a copy of the order dated 10.04.2018 before the Commission, which is taken on record. He further states that pay in respect of Junior Resident has been fixed/regularised and arrears have been released under the salary head. The Appellant is not present to contest the arguments put forth by the Respondent.

Decision:

The Commission notes that main grievance of the appellant has been addressed and the matter is amicably resolved. No further adjudication is required in the matter.

The appeal is disposed off accordingly.

Y. K. Sinha (वाई. के . नसन्द्हा) Information Commissioner(सूचना आयुक्त ) Authenticated true copy (अभिप्रमाणितसत्यापितप्रतत) Ram Parkash Grover (राम प्रकाश ग्रोवर) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26180514 Page 2 of 2