Central Information Commission
Karan Singh Tekram vs Ordnance Factory Board on 30 March, 2022
Author: Vanaja N Sarna
Bench: Vanaja N Sarna
क य सच ु ना आयोग
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
बाबा गंगनाथ माग
Baba Gangnath Marg
मु नरका, नई द ल - 110067
Munirka, New Delhi-110067
File no.: - CIC/OFBKO/A/2020/124215
In the matter of
Karan Singh Tekam
... Appellant
VS
1. CPIO
Vehicle Factory,
Jabalpur - 482009
2. CPIO / Officiating GM(OPS - 1),
Armoured Vehicles Nigam Ltd (AVNL),
HVF Road, Avadi, Chennai - 600054
... Respondents
RTI application filed on : Date not mentioned - received by CPIO on 11-05-2020 CPIO replied on : 27/05/2020 First appeal filed on : 09/06/2020 First Appellate Authority order : 24/06/2020 Second Appeal Filed on : 09/07/2020 Date of Hearing : 29/03/2022 Date of Decision : 29/03/2022 The following were present:
Appellant: Present over phone Respondent: M.K Maurya, Joint GM and CPIO, present over phone Information Sought:
The Appellant has sought the following information:
1. Whether the recruitment method adopted for Ex-Trade Apprentices of Vehicle Factory, Jabalpur who were appointed as industrial employees during 2003 to 2008, was absorption method of recruitment or otherwise. If 1 otherwise, then what kind of written test was conducted for recruitment. Provide the copies of Rules/Orders/Documents in this regard.
2. Provide detailed information about 28th Batch of Trade Apprentices of vehicle Factory Jabalpur, i.e. Marks-wise Seniority List of 28th batch including their name, trade, NCTVT training, joining year, NCTVT passing year and marks obtained in NCTVT Exam.
Grounds for Second Appeal The CPIO did not provide the desired information. Submissions made by Appellant and Respondent during Hearing:
The appellant submitted that he is not satisfied with the reply of the CPIO. The CPIO submitted that whatever information was available was given to the appellant. Moreover, the information which is not available cannot be created. Observations:
Based on a perusal of the record, it was noted that the CPIO vide letter dated 27.05.2020 replied to the appellant and informed him that in respect of point no. 1 the information sought is in question answer mode, hence cannot be provided. However, at the relevant time recruitment of Ex TAs was covered by OFB letter dated 15/20-10-1999. In respect of point no. 2 it was replied that the information sought is not readily available. The FAA vide order dated 24.06.2020 disposed of the first appeal and held that the information sought is 32 years old and hence, information cannot be given.
The appellant in his second appeal submitted that since the matter pertains to Recruitment and Seniority of Ex-Trade Apprentices, which is a critical matter for career prospects of the employees, not holdingsuch a vital document with Vital Factory Jabalpur is not understood ,rather it seems that it is an attempt to conceal the information by PIO/VFJ and AA/VFJ. In respect of point no. 2 the Commission observed that the information sought is very old , but even if the information sought was readily available, the same are related to third parties and hence, exempted from disclosure u/s 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. In respect of point no. 1 a suitable reply was already given. Decision:
The Commission finds no merit in the second appeal of the appellant. The reply given was as per record and hence, no action is required.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Vanaja N. Sarna (वनजा एन. सरना)
Information Commissioner (सच
ू ना आयु त)
2
Authenticated true copy
(अ भ मा णत स या पत त)
A.K. Assija (ऐ.के. असीजा)
Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक)
011- 26182594 /
दनांक / Date
3