Central Information Commission
Mrrakesh Kumar vs Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited on 9 May, 2016
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26101592
File No. CIC/BS/A/2015/000613/10287
09 May 2016
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Rakesh Kumar,
R/o - F-219, Narmada Building,
Staff Telecom Quarters, Opp. IIT Powal,
Mumbai - 400076
Respondent : CPIO / Sub - Divisional Engineer (Admn),
BSNL,
O/o Dy. General Manager (Mtce),
Western Telecom Region,
11th Floor, Telephone House,
Dadar, (W), Mumbai - 400028
RTI application filed on : 05/09/2014
PIO replied on : 09/09/2014
First appeal filed on : 07/10/2014 & 20/11/2014
First Appellate Authority order : 17/12/2014
Second Appeal dated : 26/03/2015
Information sought:
1. Who has the authority to cancel/reject/re-examine the Medical leave of concerned Executive officer and on what ground/reason in WTR (Maintenance) office/unit?
2. How many executive officers have been denied of their medical leave since last 5 year to till date.....their detail?
3. What is the minimum no. of employee required for the functioning of the office/unit in WTR (Maintenance).
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
The CPIO has not provided the desired information.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present Appellant: Absent Respondent: Mr. Nitin Rokade CPIO through VC M: 9420686595 The CPIO stated that the information sought by the appellant in his RTI application dated 05/09/2014 was provided vide letter date 09/09/2014 and the reply was upheld by the FAA who passed a detailed speaking order on 17/12/2014. He further stated that the appellant was offered inspection of the records but did not avail the opportunity. He claimed that the appellant is a habitual litigant and has been charge sheeted three times and action has been taken against him Page 1 of 2 as per BSNL conduct rules. The appellant is not present for canvassing his case/contesting the CPIO's submissions.
Decision notice:
At the outset it is clarified that the CPIO, under the RTI Act, is required to furnish information/documents as available on record; however, eliciting answers to queries, redressal of grievance, reasons for non compliance of rules/contesting the actions of the respondent public authority are outside the purview of the Act.
From the CPIO's submissions it appears that the information has been provided. If, however, the appellant has any doubt in the matter the CPIO should permit him to inspect the relevant records relating to his RTI application dated 05/09/2014 and also allow him to take photocopies/extracts therefrom, free of cost, upto 10 pages within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
BASANT SETH Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy:
(R. L. Gupta) Dy. Registrar/Designated Officer Page 2 of 2