Central Information Commission
Umesh Chandra Saxena vs National Informatics Centre on 21 December, 2017
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Baba Gang Nath Marg, Munirka,
New Delhi -110067
Tel : +91-11-26186535
Appeal No. CIC/NICHQ/A/2017/186914, CIC/NICHQ/A/2017/186915
CIC/NICHQ/C/2017/101409, CIC/NICHQ/A/2017/107374
Appellant: Mr. Umesh Chandra Saxena,
Respondent: Central Public Information Officer,
Scientist D, (RTI Divn.),
Ministry of Electronics & Information Technology,
National Informatics Center,
A-Block,CGO Complex,
Lodhi Road,
New Delhi-110003.
Date of Hearing: 18.12.2017
Dated of Decision: 18.12.2017
ORDER
Facts:
CIC/NICHQ/A/2017/186914
1. The appellant filed RTI application dated 13.7.2016 seeking certified copies of remarks of authorities/DG (NIC) to whom paper was marked on the following points:-
a) Email dated 6.4.2015 to HOD (Pers.), letter dated 3.11.2015, 16.3.2016 to HOG(P&A), letter dated 25.4.2016, 25.5.2016 and 16.6.2016 to DG(NIC) in r/o posting in a light section on medical/health grounds;
b) Representations dated 1.9.2015, 22.4.2016 and 16.6.2016 in r/o promotion of DD (in Situ) from the date of approved service.
c) Notes dated 31.8.2015, 23.11.2015, 21.12.15 and 13.5.2016 in r/o deployment of proper staff and hierarchy in Service Support Section etc.
2. The CPIO responded on 26.8.2016. The appellant filed First Appeal dated 29.8.2016 with First Appellate Authority (FAA). The FAA responded on 18.10.2016. The appellant filed second appeal on 3.2.2017 before the Commission as relevant information/documents have not been provided by CPIO/AA.
CIC/NICHQ/A/2017/186915
3. The appellant filed RTI application dated 9.9.2016 seeking information on 19 points viz. How much total money is expended on purchase of biometric machines for attendance since Jaunary, 2014; who monitors the attendances on biometric machines etc.
4. The CPIO responded on 13.10.2016. The appellant filed First Appeal dated 17.10.2016 with First Appellate Authority (FAA). The FAA responded on 17.10.2016. The appellant filed second appeal on 22.11.2016 before the Commission as relevant information/documents have not been provided by CPIO/AA.
CIC/NICHQ/C/2017/101409
5. The complainant filed RTI application dated 28.10.2016 seeking information on 17 points viz. why the sections/divisions/works are not declared sensitive but posts (excluding Group-C) are declared sensitive for some sections/divisions vide circular number- 17(8)/2007-Pers. dated 29.9.2016; under which rule RR/procedure, the Group C Posts are exempted from declaration as sensitive when person is posted in sensitive sections/divisions/works; reasons, aim, necessity and objective of declaring the posts sensitive in some sections vide above said circular after completion of about 40 years of existence of NIC etc.
6. The CPIO responded on 29.11.2016. The complainant filed First Appeal dated 2.12.2016 with First Appellate Authority (FAA). The response of FAA is not available on record. The complainant filed a complaint on 22.11.2016 before the Commission as relevant information/documents have not been provided by CPIO/AA.
CIC/NICHQ/A/2017/107374
7. The appellant filed RTI application dated 7.12.2016 seeking certified copy of request note to post Scientist D in Service Support Section (SSS); the role/responsibilities, duties and accountabilities of Scientist D at SSS etc.
8. The CPIO responded on 9.1.2016. The appellant filed First Appeal dated 12.1.2016 with First Appellate Authority (FAA). The FAA responded on 30.1.2016. The appellant filed second appeal on 3.2.2017 before the Commission as relevant information/documents have not been provided by CPIO/AA.
Hearing:
9. The respondent Mr. Swarup Dutta, CPIO and Mr. Ganesh Chander, Section Officer participated in the hearing personally. The appellant/complainant did not participate in the hearing. CIC/NICHQ/A/2017/186914
10. The respondent stated that the appellant/complainant had submitted certain representations through e-mail to Head of Personnel and wanted to know the action taken on his representations. The respondent further stated that the appellant/complainant sought posting in a 'light section' on medical/health grounds. The respondent said that on the appellant's request, he was posted in another section. After his posting in another section, appellant/complainant had gone on leave. The respondent stated that the appellant/complainant does not want to work.
11. During the hearing the respondent read out the reply given to the appellant/complainant.
12. The respondent stated that they will provide information to the appellant/complainant on point 1(b) viz. action taken on his representations dated 1.9.2015, 22.4.2016 and 16.6.2016 in r/o promotion of DD (In Situ) from the date of approved service within 30 days.
13. On point 6 of the RTI application viz. "under which procedure, rules or recruitment rules, the regular Deputy Directors are posted in 'light sections' and Dy. Director (in situ) in 'heavy work load' sections. The transparent criteria of allotment may kindly be provided", the respondent stated that they will provide information to the appellant/complainant.
CIC/NICHQ/A/2017/186915
14. The respondent stated that they had responded to the appellant/complainant on all the points of the RTI applications except point Nos. 6, 7, 8, 10 and 11 which were transferred to NICSI. The respondent stated that NICSI had replied to the appellant/complainant vide letter dated 17.10.2016 and 19.10.2016.
15. During the hearing the respondent read out point-wise reply given to the appellant/complainant. This was found to be satisfactory. CIC/NICHQ/C/2017/101409
16. During the hearing the respondent read out point-wise reply given by him to appellant/complainant. On point 6 of the RTI application the respondent stated that record is not available with him.
17. The Commission observed that information on point 6 of the RTI application is not satisfactory. Respondent should provide information on point 6 of the RTI application.
CIC/NICHQ/A/2017/107374
18. During the hearing the respondent read out point-wise reply given by him to appellant/complainant.
19. The Commission observed that information on point 7 of the RTI application is not satisfactory. Respondent should provide information on point 7 of the RTI application viz. the names of Scientist D who are already functioning on the date of RTI as H.O.D. of an administrative section in NIC-A Block building, CGO Complex, New Delhi-3.
Discussion/ observation:
CIC/NICHQ/A/2017/186914
20. The respondent should provide information to the appellant as per para 12 and 13 above within 30 days.
CIC/NICHQ/A/2017/186915
21. The action/steps taken by the respondent in dealing with the RTI application are satisfactory.
CIC/NICHQ/C/2017/101409
22. The respondent should provide information to the appellant as per para 17 above within 30 days.
CIC/NICHQ/A/2017/107374
23. The respondent should provide information to the appellant as per para 19 above within 30 days.
24. It is observed that being an employee, the appellant has asked many questions, which appear to be viz. (1) in case No. CIC/NICHQ/A/2017/186914-
"to provide the period an individual can be retained forcibly in a section in which he/she is unwilling to continue especially on health grounds & writes to change? Reply with reasons, and under which procedure rules or recruitment rules, the regular Deputy Directors are posted in light sections and Dy. Director (In situ) in heavy work load sections. The transparent criteria of allotment may kindly be provided; (2) CIC/NICHQ/A/2017/186915 - to provide information about Q. 17 and 18 of RTI application that what is the time limit to replace an officer from one section to another on unwilling from a particular section on some reasonable or personal grounds and to kindly inform about the intension, criteria & aim of NIC not to consider requests of undersigned for posting in other sections as represented in already submitted representations respectively, (3) CIC/NICHQ/C/2017/101409 - kindly inform under which condition/ procedure, it is not a harassment to an officer to retain forcibly in unwilling section without sufficient reasons/justifications as in normal procedure, an unwilling person may not be retained in unwilling section especially on sensitive post/section when several administrative sections including light sections exists in the organization; reference is being made to OM No. 20(9)/2016-Pers.
Dated 26.10.2016, kindly inform on which date or after how many months/years, the undersigned will be posted in other section as referred . OM could be issued after more than 01 year after several requests on medical ground of self; kindly inform under which rules, procedure and circumstances, health grounds of a Government servant may be ignored or cannot be considered for even change of a section."
25. All of these queries display only a desire for transfer from his then place of posting, rather than seeking information. This appears to be an abuse of the RTI Act. The appellant is advised to desist from asking such questions and admonished to not repeat this.
Decision:
26. The respondent is directed to take action as per paras 20, 22 and 23.
The appeals are disposed of. Copy of the order be given to the parties free of cost.
(Radha Krishna Mathur) Chief Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy (S.C. Sharma) Dy. Registrar