Central Information Commission
Maj Bikram Singh (Retd.) vs Department Of Millitary Affairs on 22 October, 2025
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
File No: CIC/DPTMA/A/2024/620949
Maj Bikram Singh (Retd.) .....अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
PIO,
ADG (D & V), AG's Branch,
Sena Bhawan, New Delhi - 110011 .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 16.10.2025
Date of Decision : 22.10.2025
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 21.12.2023
CPIO replied on : 24.01.2024
First appeal filed on : 26.03.2024
First Appellate Authority's order : 23.04.2024
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 15.05.2024
Information sought:
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 21.12.2023 (offline) seeking the following information:
"REQUEST FOR INFORMATION UNDER RTI ACT-2005: MAJ BIKRAM SINGH FOR CASE NO: RC 02(A)/2016-HYD, GE(U) SECUNDERABAD (MATTER OF CORRUPTION AND HUMAN RIGHTS)
1. With due respect, I above mentioned Officer need information/documents as I am undergoing Prosecution Trial Action by the order of GOC, Telangana and Andhra Sub Area (TASA), PIN-900453 Page 1 of 6 c/o 56 APO. It is further submitted that Prosecution Sanction had been denied by D (Vigilance), MoD vide their order ID No: C-13011/3/2016-D (Vig) dated 01 May 2018 in the same case. Kindly provide the following to produce in my defense in ongoing GCM proceedings :-
(a) Copy/Copies or Reference of Army Act, Army Rules, Army regulation which are applicable in such cases where Prosecution has already denied in the name of The President of India even though Army can Prosecute delequent officer on Pretext of Regular Department Action (RDA).
(b) Copy of Order/Direction from D (Vigilance), MoD issued to ADG (DV) in my case for Regular Department Action (RDA).
(c) Standard Operating Procedure (SOP), Army Order, Policy/Policies applicable in RDA cases dealt by Army, applicable for Army Officer to deal with as per Law/Direction of competent authorities.
(d) CVC guidelines, Ministry of Defence guideline applicable in RDA cases, available in your Ministry/IHQ of MoD (Army).
2. Necessary RTI fee of Rs 50/- (Rupees fifty only) as Postal Order No 85G 961167 is enclosed. I will pay if required more than paid fee please.
3. RTI Application may be forwarded to concern CPIO in case your Ministry does not hold above asked information/documents under Section 6(3) of RTI Act 2005."
2. The CPIO, Ministry of Defence, D(Vigilance/MES&BRO) furnished a reply to the Appellant on 24.01.2024 stating as under:
"Please find enclosed a copy of RTI Application dated 21.12.2023 of Major Bikram Singh, received from Deputy Director (Vigilance) & CPIO vide ID No. C-31019/1/2023-D(Vig) dated 05.01.2024. In this regard, it is informed that the information sought in para 1(a) 1(c) & 1(d) the said RTI Application pertains to D&V Dte of AG's Branch. Therefore, the abovementioned RTI Application is hereby transferred under the provision of Section 6(3) of RTI Act, 2005 for necessary action at your end.
2. Further, in r/o para 1(b) of said RTI Application, the copy of letter No. C13011/3/2016/D(Vig.)/132 dated 03.02.2021 issued to ADG (DV), AG's Branch is enclosed.
3. It is requested to provide necessary information directly to the applicant in r/o para 1(a) 1(c) & 1(d) the said RTI Application."Page 2 of 6
3. Being dissatisfied, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 26.03.2024. The FAA vide its order dated 23.04.2024, held as under:
"WHEREAS an application of appeal by SL-04880Y Maj Bikram Singh (Retd) has been received in this office on 08.02.2024 against RTI application dated 21.12.2023.
AND WHEREAS the information sought in para 1(b) of RTI application dated 21.12.2023 was provided by the CPIO vide MoD, D(Vig-M&B) ID No. 31019/03/RTI/2022-D(Vig-MES&BRO)/112 dated 24.01.2024 (copy enclosed). As the information pertaining to remaining parts, was not heid by D(Vig-M&B), the said RTI application was transferred to CPIO, D&V Dte of AG's Branch, Sena Bhawan, New Delhi vide letter No. 31019/03/RTI/2022-D(Vig-MES&BRO)/112 dated 24.01.2024 as the rest of the information pertained to them.
AND WHEREAS, D&V Dte of AG's Branch instead of providing information to your goodself has forwarded a letter No. C/00991/454/AG/DV-4A dated 25.01.2024 which has been received through MoD, D(Vigilance) letter No. C-31019/1/2023-D(Vig) dated 01.02.2024. Ibid letters are enclosed herewith for your information.
NOW THEREFORE it is stated that any information related to RDA against Army Officer is not related to MoD, D(Vig-MES&BRO). MoD, D(Vig- MES&BRO) deals with civilian cadres with MES and BRO. Being an Army Officer you may approach appropriate Army division for desired information. Therefore, any information, if needed, may be sought from concerned Army division and the present appeal is hereby treated as disposed off.
If the applicant is not satisfied with the above information, he may prefer to file Second Appeal under the provisions of RTI Act, 2005."
4. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Not Present.
Respondent: Shri J M Sharma, CPIO and Shri D P Singh present in person.Page 3 of 6
5. Proof of having served a copy of Second Appeal on Respondent while filing the same in CIC on 15.05.2024 is not available on record. Respondent confirms non-service.
6. Written submissions of the Respondent are taken on record and the same is reproduced hereinbelow:
"2. Brief of the Case. The appellant Maj Bikram Singh (Retd) had filed a RTI application seeking copies of Army Act, Army Rule, Army Regulation, order/direction and SOP related to Regular Department Action (RDA).
3. Application under RTI. Initially, no RTI application dt 21 Dec 2023 was registered/ received by this Cell.
4. First Appeal.
Due to non-receipt of information appellant filed First Appeal dt 26 Mar 2024, which was received at this Cell on 18 Apr 2024 alongwith initial RTI application dt 21 Dec 2023 at first time. Accordingly the case was processed with concerned agency of this Headquarters and based upon the inputs/ reply received from the agency, information was provisioned to the appellant vide this RTI Cell letter No. A/810027/RTI/OF_86944 (Appeal) dt 10 Jun 2024 (copy enclosed at Annexure I).
5. Second Appeal. Notice of hearing for Second Appeal dt 15 May 2024 was received at this RTI Cell office on 06 Oct 2025 and same has been listed for hearing at 1230 hrs on 16 Oct 2025. fter scrutinizing the Second Appeal as received alongwith the notice
6. A of hearing, the case was re-processed with the concerned agency of this Headquarters and the inputs/reply as received for the concerned agency is given as under :-
6.1: Reply to the query has already been given to the appellant vide this RTI Cell letter No A/810027/RTI/ OF 86944 (Appeal) dated 10 Jun 2024 (Copy enclosed at Annexure 1).
6.2: MoD/D (Vig) vide their MoD ID No. C- 13011/3/2016/D(Vig)/132 dt 03 Feb 2021 intimated direction of Competent Authority to take action Page 4 of 6 under Army Act (CBI recommended RDA/ Court Martial against Maj Bikram Singh). (Copy not attached being Confidential).
6.3: The action to be taken by Military Authorities on Investigation of cases by CBI is given in ADG DV letter No C/00994/6/AG/DV-5 dt 30 Sep 93 (Copy not attached being Confidential).
6.4: Reply to the query has already been given to the appellant vide this RTI Cell letter No A/810027/RTI/ OF_86944 (Appeal) dated 10 Jun 2024 (Copy enclosed at Annexure I). In addition, CVC guidelines on Prosecution and Departmental Action is given vide CVC letter No N/99//G/87 dt 30 Sep 2005 and is available on internet https://cvc.gov.in.
Submission and Recommendation.
It Is submitted that the case has appropriately been disposed by the CPIO, IHQ of MoD (Army) vide letter mentioned at Para 03 above and additional inputs by means of this submission vide Para 6 above, it is recommended that the case be disposed as the Information as available and permissible under the provision of RTI Act 2005 was provisioned.."
7. The Respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that complete point-wise reply/information, as per the documents available on their record has been provided to the Appellant as available at relevant period. All RUD (Relied Upon Documents) for the GCM proceedings has already been given to the Appellant.
8. He further submitted that copy of their written submissions has also been shared with the Appellant.
Decision:
9. The Commission upon perusal of records observes that the main premise of instant Appeal was non-furnishing of information by the CPIO. The Commission observes that complete point-wise reply/information in the matter has already been provided to the Appellant as per his RTI application as available at the relevant time Page 5 of 6 within the period stipulated under the RTI Act. Further, copy of written submissions has also been shared with the Appellant.
10. It is an admitted fact that the CPIO is only a communicator of information based on the records held in the office and hence, he is not expected to create information as per the desire of the Appellant.
11. In this regard, the Commission finds no infirmity in the reply and as a sequel to it further clarifications tendered by the CPIO during hearing as the same was found to be in consonance with the provisions of RTI Act.
12. No intervention of the Commission is warranted in the matter.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Vinod Kumar Tiwari (िवनोद कुमार ितवारी) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स!ािपत ित) (S. Anantharaman) Dy. Registrar 011- 26181927 Date Copy To:
The FAA, ADG Br, IHQ of MoD Army, K.G. Block, 4th Floor, DHQ Post, New Delhi - 110011 Page 6 of 6 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)