Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

Ghan Shyam Dass vs Mcd on 28 February, 2017

                     CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                    August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place,
                               New Delhi-110066

                                              F. No.CIC/YA/A/2016/000836

Date of Hearing                      :   27.02.2017
Date of Decision                     :   27.02.2017

Appellant/Complainant                :   Mr. Ghan Shyam Dass


Respondent                           :   East Delhi Municipal Corporation
                                         Through:
                                         Mr. Sanjay Bhatt, Accounts Officer
                                         Mr. Philip V.P., Dy. Controller

Information Commissioner             :   Shri Yashovardhan Azad

Relevant facts emerging from appeal:

RTI application filed on             :    12.10.2015
PIO replied on                       :    13.11.2015
First Appeal filed on                :    20.11.2015
First Appellate Order on             :    03.12.2015
2nd Appeal/complaint received on     :    02.02.2016

Information sought

and background of the case:

The appellant filed RTI application dated 12.10.2015 seeking information regarding his son Naveen Kumar who worked under the administrative control w.r.t. 24.01.2007 to 01.10.2015 as Data Entry Operator against the vacant post which was later converted into contract by the Corporation. The appellant wanted to know the rules & Regulations and Govt. Circular followed by them before taking such decision in his son's case, reason and ground for taking such decision and also wanted to know whether there was any official complaint against his son or any plan of action for termination of contractual agreements of those working as DEO in all other Zones.

The CPIO vide letter dated 13.11.2015 responded to each of the query. Not satisfied with the response received from CPIO, the appellant filed first appeal. The FAA upheld the reply of CPIO vide order dated 03.12.2015. Feeling aggrieved, the appellant approached the Commission. Relevant facts emerging during hearing:

The Respondent appeared during the hearing while the Appellant remained absent. Respondent reiterates that information as available has already been provided to the appellant.

Decision:

The Commission notes that information sought by the appellant has indeed been provided already. There is no further information to be disbursed. The appellant has not appeared to plead his case. Thus nothing remains to be adjudicated in this case.

The appeal is disposed of accordingly.

(Yashovardhan Azad) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against application and payment of the charges prescribed under the Act to the CPIO of this Commission.

(R.P.Grover) Designated Officer Copy to:-

Nodal Officer-RTI Cell,                   First Appellate Authority under
Accounts Officer-(F&G), East             RTI
Delhi Municipal Corporation, O/o         Deputy Controller of Accounts-
Chief Accountant-cum-Financial           (F&G), East Delhi Municipal
Advisor, 419, Udyog Sadan,               Corporation, F & G Branch,
Patparganj Ind. Area, Delhi-             Headquarters, 419, Udyog Sadan,
110092                                   Patparganj Ind. Area, Delhi-
                                         110092
Ghan Shyam Dass
House no. C 12/222, Yamuna
Vihar, Delhi-110053