Central Information Commission
Mohan Choudhary vs Forest Department Ut Of J & K on 26 March, 2025
Author: Heeralal Samariya
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/FDUJK/A/2024/607267
Shri Mohan Choudhary ... अपीलकताग/Appellant
VERSUS/बनाम
PIO, Forest Department UT of J & K ...प्रनतवािीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 24.03.2025
Date of Decision : 24.03.2025
Chief Information Commissioner : Shri Heeralal Samariya
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 24.07.2023
PIO replied on : 11.09.2023
First Appeal filed on : 26.10.2023
First Appellate Order on : NA
2ndAppeal/complaint received on : 22.02.2024
Information soughtand background of the case:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 24.07.2023 seeking information on the following points:-
"1. Kindly provide the copy of Inquiry Report submitted by Inquiry Officer (P/S, ARI & Training JK) in reference to Government Order No: 183-JK (GAD) of 2023 Dated: 07-02-2023, which has been conducted by JK Administration without paying salary (Even subsistence allowance) & allowance to Sh. Mohan Choudhary (while Ignoring order of MoEF&CC, New Delhi dated: 29th March 2023 treating him officer of JK Cadre).
2. Kindly provide certified copy of rule/regulation or any provisions under service permitting JK UT Administration for non-disbursal of salary (Even subsistence allowance) to an Officer while conducting Inquiry vide Government Order of February 2023 for period of Six months (February to July 2023). If no such rules/regulation permits under service rules, then please inform no such rules allows. (Conducting Inquiry by JK UT without paying salary (even subsistence allowance) & allowances of an Officer is clear violation of Article 14 & 21 of Constitution of India)."
The CPIO, DS, General Administrative Department vide letter dated 03.08.2023 replied as under:-
"Reply: 1. In terms of rule 8(h) of RTI Act 2005, the same cannot be provided.Page 1 of 4
2. Pertains to Department of Forest, Ecology, and Environment. Therefore the RTI is forwarded to PIO of the concerned department."
The CPIO, Department of Forest, Ecology, and Environment, UT of J&K vide reply dated 11.09.2023 responded as under:
In this connection, I am to say that the officer was transferred to UT of Ladakh and he has failed to comply with the said orders of transfer. Instead, the officer, through medium of RTI applications, has questioned the Competency of Hon'ble Lieutenant Governor and/or Administrative Secretary, Forest, Ecology and Environment Department for such transfer, taking plea that he belongs to Indian Forest Service (IFS) and only MoEF&CC, GoI can effect his transfer. The earlier applications under RTI Act, regarding the matter, were appropriately replied to and appeals have been disposed of by the Appellate Authority as well.
The matter of the fact is that no modification was effected to the orders of his transfer and, practically, he is presumed to be an officer posted in UT of Ladakh and drawal of his salary rests with UT administration of Ladakh, unless an expressive order is issued to this effect. With regard to copy of inquiry report, and non-disbursal of his salary/subsistence allowance, the same is under examination in the General Administration Department.
Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 29.08.2023. The FAA, Special Secretary, General Administrative Department vide order dated 06.10.2023 held as under:-
"During the course of hearing, the CPIO, GAD was asked to state reason for not providing the copy of Inquiry Report to the appellant. To this, the CPIO, GAD submitted that the Inquiry Report cannot be disclosed with the appellant until its final conclusion. He further submitted that the conclusion of inquiry occurs only after its acceptance or otherwise by the Competent Authority. With regard to Point No. 2, the CPIO, GAD submitted that this inquiry is unrelated to the release of the applicant's salary and the salary has not been withheld due to the Initiation of this inquiry. Consequently, It is not a matter related to the officer's life and liberty. The CPIO further submitted that the GAD ordered the Inquiry solely based on the alleged misbehaviour of the officer. The suspension of the applicant's salary and allowances, if not paid, falls under the purview of Forest Department, as the applicant belongs to the Forest Services cadre and the Forest Department is responsible for salary-related matters. Accordingly, for matter related to salary, the case has been transferred to PIO, Forest Department for further action, at their end.
Heard both the parties. In view of the submissions made by the CPIO, GAD being appropriate and the information sought by the appellant does not seem to have larger public interest. The appeal is disposed of."
The Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 26.10.2023 before the FAA/O/o, Principal Secretary, Department of Forest, Ecology, and Environment, UT of J&K. Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
The Appellant has submitted written submission dated 15.03.2025 stating that though inquiry report in in response to query number 1 of his RTI application has Page 2 of 4 been provided, he is entitled to information sought vide query number 2, placing reliance on decision of the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam in WP(C) No. 11973 of 2009 (N) WP(C) No. 6796 of 2009(T).
A written submission dated 19.03.2025 has been received from CPIO, GAD, Govt. of J&K reiterating the abovementioned facts.
Written submission dated 20.03.2025 has been received from PIO, Department of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs emphasising on Section 3, 2(j), 2(f) of the RTI Act.
Written submission dated 20.03.2025 has been received from the Department of Forest, Ecology and Environment, Govt. of J&K which reveals that the PIO, Forest, Ecology and Environment, J&K had responded vide reply dated 18.10.2023 stating as under:
Sir, Kindly find enclosed herewith a copy OM No. GAD-VIGORTI/58/2023-09-GAD, dated 20.09.2023, received from General Administration Department, under the RTI Act, 2005. In this connection I am to say that that with regard to the implementation of office order F. No. 32012/01/2016-IFS-I (AGMUT), dated 29.03.2023 of MoEFCC, GoI, New Delhi, CPIO is not supposed to draw inferences or opinions to treat you an officer of UT of J&K or not.
Accordingly, you are requested to desist from such hypothetical questions in the future while filing applications under RTI Act, 2005 The PIO, Forest, Ecology and Environment further stated that the First Appeal dated 26.10.2023 filed by the Appellant had been duly rejected by the FAA vide order dated 01.12.2023. Copies of relevant documents have been duly annexed with the written submission.
Hearing was scheduled after giving prior notice to both the parties. Appellant: Not present Respondent: Shri Naresh Kumar- Addl. Secretary, Department of Forest, Ecology and Environment and Shri Shoaib Noor- Dy. Secretary, General Administration Department, Govt. of J&K were present through video conference present during hearing.
The Respondents from the Department of Forest, Ecology and Environment and general Administration Department, Govt. of J&K present during hearing reiterated that information as available on record and permissible to be disclosed under the provisions of the RTI Act had been duly provided to the Appellant, as mentioned clearly in the respective written submissions filed by them.
Decision:
Perusal of records of the case reveals that the information available on record with the public authority and defined as information under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, has been duly provided to the Appellant. The Appellant is aggrieved by alleged non payment of his salary by the Government of J&K, which is countered by the Respondent's arguments that the Appellant had been transferred to UT of Ladakh Page 3 of 4 and he has failed to comply with the said orders of transfer. Hence appropriate action had to be initiated against him. However the said proceeding being a matter of administrative and policy related decision of the Respondent regarding transfer posting of officers, cannot be adjudicated under the scope and ambit of the RTI Act. Considering the fact that the written submissions filed by the Respondents from Department of Forest, Ecology and Environment and the General Administration Department, Govt. of J&K are detailed, succinct and self explanatory, the Respondents from the respective Departments present during hearing are directed to send a copy of the same with annexures if any, to the Appellant, within two weeks of receipt of this order and submit a compliance report in this regard before the Commission within one week thereafter.
The Commission is of the considered view that the response sent by the Respondents from Department of Forest, Ecology and Environment and the General Administration Department, Govt. of J&K are relevant and appropriate, besides being well within the precincts of the RTI Act. Hence, no further intervention is warranted in this case, under the RTI Act.
The case is disposed off as such.
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 4 of 4 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)