Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

Sompal vs Gnctd on 4 September, 2019

                                 के न्द्रीयसूचनाआयोग
                      Central Information Commission
                              बाबागंगनाथमागग,मुननरका
                       Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                        नईददल्ली, New Delhi - 110067

नितीय अपील संख्या / Second Appeal No. CIC/GNCTD/A/2017/157908

Shri Sompal                                                    ... अपीलकताग/Appellant
                                       VERSUS
                                         बनाम
PIO, O/o Principal, V.S. Agriculture                     ...प्रनतवादीगण /Respondents
Sr. Sec. School, Khera Garhi, Delhi
110082

Date of Hearing                         :   22.05.2019
Date of Decision                        :   04.09.2019
Information Commissioner          :         Shri Y. K. Sinha
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:

RTI application filed on                :   19.05.2017
PIO replied on                          :   13.07.2017
First Appeal filed on                   :   23.06.2017
First Appellate Order on                :   Nil
2ndAppeal/complaint received on         :   22.08.2017

Information sought

and background of the case:

The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 19.05.2017, seeking information on three points:-

1. What percentage of my salary is being received by me?

2. Currently, what salary I am entitled to receive?

3. Is there any complaint in any court against any employee who is in the Vedic Sanskrit Agriculture Sr. Sec. School? If there is a complaint against an employee, then the name of the employee, the name of the court, the address and number of the cases registered may be provided to me.

(Translated from Hindi) Page 1 of 2 PIO/Principal, V.S. Agriculture Sr. Sec. School, vide letter dated 13.07.2017 provided point wise reply to the Appellant. Dissatisfied with the reply received from the PIO, the Appellant filed First Appeal on 23.06.2017. Feeling aggrieved due to non receipt of reply from the FAA, the Appellant filed the instant Second Appeal before the Commission. Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:

Both the parties are present and heard at length. The Appellant submits that the Respondent has not supplied the information as per his RTI application which is a violation of the RTI Act. The Respondent submits that the Appellant is a suspended employee of V.S. Agriculture Senior Secondary School who had been suspended due to fraudulent documentation and financial irregularities for which departmental enquiry was then under process and has now been finalised. PIO further submits that during the period of suspension he was being paid a subsistence allowance which is applicable to a suspended employee and accordingly his RTI application has been replied to vide letter dated 13.07.2017.

Decision:

On hearing of the averments and perusal of the reply given by the PIO, the Commission is of the opinion that the information provided to the Appellant is not complete and unsatisfactory. Hence the PIO is directed to supply a revised and comprehensive reply to the Appellant under intimation to the Commission within three weeks of the receipt of this order.

The Appeal is disposed off accordingly.

Y. K. Sinha (वाई. के . नसन्द्हा) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयुक्त ) Authenticated true copy (अभिप्रमाणितसत्यापितप्रतत) Ram Parkash Grover (राम प्रकाश ग्रोवर) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26180514 Page 2 of 2