Vijay Dhaker vs Nuclear Power Corporation Of India on 6 February, 2025

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Vijay Dhaker vs Nuclear Power Corporation Of India on 6 February, 2025

Bench: Heeralal Samariya

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

नितीय अपील संख्या / Second Appeal No. CIC/NPCOI/A/2024/619958

Shri Vijay Dhaker                                                ... अपीलकताग/Appellant
                                    VERSUS/बनाम

PIO, Nuclear Power Corporation of India                      ...प्रनतवािीगण /Respondent

Date of Hearing                           :   03.02.2025
Date of Decision                          :   03.02.2025
Chief Information Commissioner            :   Shri Heeralal Samariya

Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on          :           14.03.2024
PIO replied on                    :           08.04.2024
First Appeal filed on             :           10.04.2024
First Appellate Order on          :           08.05.2024
2ndAppeal/complaint received on   :           13.05.2024

Information sought

and background of the case:

The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 14.03.2024 seeking information on the following points:-

"I raised a Complaint Number: 22754/2023 on 28 July 2023 against one of the official of NPCIL Shri Kailash Verma on CVC portal.

1) In view to know about status of my complaint, I raised RTI: CVCOM/R/E/23/ 00806 dated-16/12/2023 to CVC

2) In response to RTI, CVC responded (letter no. 023/MISC/008/RTI/15726 dated-08.01.2024) that complaint was sent to CVO, NPCIL and further status will be provided by CPIO, NPCIL

3) CPID, CVC subsequently transferred RTI to CPIO, NPCIL for appropriate action.

4) However CPIO, NPCIL till date has not provided any response to me.

Therefore kindly provide me following details:

1) Status of my complaint

2) Full details about final action taken by all concerned authorities on my complaint against Shri Kailash Verma i.e. provide me copy of final action taken report.

Kindly note, as the complaint is specific and against a particular person, provide the documents (final action taken report and any other relevant document), if there is any other than letter No. NPCIL/HR-DC/3/911/2022/339 dated- 02/09/2022.

Page 1 of 3

In case there is no other document than letter No. NPCIL/HR- DC/3/911/2022/339 dated-02/09/2022 then provide complete details about final action taken by Competent Authority after considering my representation against Internal Complaints Committee (ICC), RR Site (point-b of letter)."

The CPIO, AGM(HR)-GM(Power), NPCIL, Mumbai vide letter dated 08.04.2024 replied as under:-

"At present disciplinary inquiry proceedings are in progress against Shri Vijay Dhaker. The information requested is related to the inquiry against Shri Vijay Dhaker thereby attracting the provision of Clause-8(1)(h) of RTI Act."

Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 10.04.2024. The FAA vide order dated 08.05.2024 which was upheld by the FAA.

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

Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:

A written submission dated 31.01.2025 has been received from CPIO reiterating the above facts and adding the following:

It is also submitted that in total Shri Vijay Dhaker has filed more than 300 RTI applications and around 170 First Appeals in various NPCIL Units and HQs on repeated similar matters on the pending disciplinary inquiry against him. This requires collection of information from various sections/Groups/Units of NPCIL and answering repeat RTI queries of similar nature involving no larger public interest. However, all efforts are made by the agencies to provide desired information in time. All of them have been responded.

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

Appellant: Present through video conference Respondent: Smt. Shraddha Gupta - CPIO, Shri Vinod Tidke - Sr. manager-HR and Smt. Varsha Bhagat - Company Secretary were present from NPCIL, Mumbai through video conference during hearing.

Deliberations between parties during the course of hearing revealed that inquiry against the Appellant had concluded but the enquiry report was pending consideration of the competent authority. The information sought by the Appellant being intrinsically connected to the inquiry per se, no information could be divulged till the report was finalised by the competent authority. Hence the Respondent had denied disclosure of the information sought by the Appellant.

Decision:

In the light of the above facts, it is noted that though the response sent by the PIO is legally accurate, considering the latest development in the matter of completion of the enquiry and pendency of its finalization by the competent authority, the Respondent is directed to send a revised reply to the Appellant about the current status of the case as orally submitted during hearing. The revised reply shall be sent to the Appellant, within two weeks of receipt of this order and a compliance report in this Page 2 of 3 regard shall be submitted by the Respondent before the Commission within one week thereafter. Considering the facts of the case, no further intervention is warranted in this case, under the RTI Act.

The appeal is disposed off accordingly.

Heeralal Samariya (हीरालाल सामररया) Chief Information Commissioner (मुख्य सूचना आयुक्त) Authenticated true copy (अनिप्रमानणत सत्यानपत प्रनत) S. K. Chitkara (एस. के . नचटकारा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26186535 Page 3 of 3 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-

Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Central Information Commission