Central Information Commission
Mani Ram Prajapati vs Military Engineer Services on 7 July, 2025
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
File No: CIC/MESER/A/2022/146167
Mani Ram Prajapati .....अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO,
Rajiv Ranjan
CPIO, Garrison
Engineer, Military Engineer
Services, Jhansi Cantt- 284OO1 .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 12.12.2023
Date of Decision : 12.12.2023
Date of SCN hearing : 01.07.2025
Date of SCN Decision : 04.07.2025
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 28-03-2022
CPIO replied on : Not on record
First appeal filed on : 17-06-2022
First Appellate Authority's order : Not on record
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 22-09-2022
Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 28.03.2022 seeking the following information:
"I have served in SDO (MES) Nowgong under GE Jhansi w.e.f. 30 Apr 2007 to 30 Jun 2009 as JE E/M. During the stay there in the financial Page 1 of 5 year 2008-09, assessment year 2009-10, income tax for Rs 11074/-has been recovered from my pay for the month of Feb 2009 vide SDO (MES) Nowgong (GE Jhansi) voucher No 43/01/265//E1C dated 11 Feb 2009, DV No 9129. The recovered amount has also been reflected in Form16. But the above amount has not been uploaded/ reflected in the Form 26 AS (Annual tax statement under section 203AA of the income tax Act 1961).
In view of the above, please intimate the reasons for non-uploading of income tax amount Rs. 11074/- recovered in the month of Feb 2009 against SDO (MES) Nowgong (GE Jhansi) voucher No. 43/01/265/E1C dated 11 Feb 2009, DV No. 9129 of Feb/2009. Please also intimate the date by which the amount will be uploaded to income tax department. Income tax office is showing above amount outstanding against me."
Having not received any response from the CPIO, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 17.06.2022. The FAA order is not on record.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing on 12.12.2023:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Present through Video-Conference.
Respondent: Col. Akhil Singh, CWE CPIO and Shri Shivam Prajapati, Accounts Department present through Video-Conference.
The Commission has passed the following observations and directions on 12.12.2023:
"The Commission, after hearing the submissions of both the parties and after perusal of records, observes that despite Appellant's fervently pursuing the matter no information was provided to him by the Respondent as per his RTI application. No plausible explanation was offered by the Respondent for not furnishing the information to the Appellant.
The Commission observes that the Appellant has specifically asked for the information related to non-uploading of Form 26 AS but the Page 2 of 5 Respondent instead of facilitating the support to their own employees has chosen not to reply him under the RTI Act and instead referred him to some other unrelated authority.
This is a grave violation of the provisions of the RTI Act and it seems that the Respondent public authority has adopted lackadaisical approach in dealing with the RTI applications of the applicants. This whole of the observations shows that the CPIO has willfully obstructed the information to the Appellant under the RTI Act with mala fide intention.
In view of the above observations, the Respondent is directed to provide complete and correct information to the Appellant as per his RTI application within three days from the date of receipt of this order under due intimation to the Commission. If the information sought is not held by them, the same can be obtained by invoking Section 5(4) of the RTI Act and be provided to the Appellant without further loss of time as stipulated above.
The Respondent is further directed to show-cause in writing that as to why maximum penalty under Section 20 of the RTI Act should not be imposed on him for contravening the provisions of the RTI Act, within two weeks from the date of receipt of this order."
Relevant Facts emerged during Show-Cause proceedings held on 01.07.2025:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Present through video conference. Respondent: Absent
1. The Appellant inter alia submitted that he is satisfied with the information provided by the Respondent and requested to close the matter.
2. The Respondent vide letter dated 09.01.2024 filed a written submission stating facts of the case, contents of the same are reproduced as under:
1. Reference Central Information Commission New Delhi letter No CIC/MESER /A/2022/146167 dt 21 Dec 2023 received vide your HQ letter No 12002/301/RTI dt 09 Jan 2024
2. It is submitted that pending amount of Rs. 11.074/- which was recovered from pay bill for the month of Feb 2009 vide DV No 9129 for financial year 2008-09 (assessement year 2009-10) on account of Income Tax in respect of MES-471022 Shri Mani Ram Prajapatı, AE E/M Page 3 of 5 (Retired) has already been uploaded/ updated on Income Tax Portal against individual PAN Card No AFDPP9124N on dated 22 Dec 2023 through M/s AK Associates, Chartered Account Lucknow please.
3. It is also submitted that a copy of Form No 27 A and statement of TDS under Section 200 (3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dt 22 Dec 2023 has already been forwarded to Central Information Commission New Delhi, applicant Shri Mani Ram Prajapati. AE E/M (Retd) and your HQ through mail and by post vide this office letter No 1301/87/E1C dt 23 Dec 2023.
In this connection a copy of mail receipt dt 23 Dec 2023 is also enclosed please.
4. However, due to wrong address mentioned in RTI application, the by post copy addressed to Shri Mani Ram Prajapati, AE E/M (Retd) has been received back from Post Office Photocopy of envelope is also enclosed please.
5. This is for your info and further necessary action please."
Decision in respect of Show-Cause proceedings:
3. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both the parties and perusal of the records, observed that information sought has now been duly provided and no deliberate or mala fide intent is established on the part of the CPIO. The Appellant submitted that he is now satisfied with the information provided and has no further grievance. He also requested closure of the matter. In view of the satisfactory compliance and submissions, the show-cause notice is dropped.
The matter stands closed accordingly.
Vinod Kumar Tiwari (िवनोद कुमार ितवारी) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स!ािपत ित) (S. Anantharaman) Dy. Registrar 011- 26181927 Date Page 4 of 5 Copy To:
The FAA, Commander Works Engineer, Military Engineer Services, Jhansi Cantt- 284OO1 Page 5 of 5 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)