Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Mrrakesh Kumar vs Ministry Of Defence on 10 May, 2016

                 CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                Club Building (Near Post Office)
                Old JNU Campus, New Delhi­110067
                  Tel: +91­11­26106140/26179548

                            (Interim Order)

                                                        File No. 
                                         CIC/CC/A/2014/000542/DP
                               Date of Interim Order: 10/05/2016
Relevant facts emerging from the Appeal:

Appellant              :     Rakesh Kumar Soni ,
                             (Safaikaramchari)
                             Cantonment Board,
                             Jalandhar Cantt.

Respondent             :     CPIO,
                             Cantt. Board
                             Jalandhar Cantt.

RTI        application  :    09/05/2014
filed on
PIO replied on          :    09/07/2014
First   appeal   filed  :    08/08/2014
on
First        Appellate  :    No order
Authority order
Second Appeal dated  :       16/09/2014


Information sought

:

Reservation of Physically Handicapped persons in Promotion:­
(i) How many disabled persons have got promotion in  their services from 2005 to 2013 in Cantt. Board,  Jalandhar Cantt.?
(ii) How many employees are hearing impaired among them? 

He wants the full details of all hearing impaired  employee?

(iii) Is there any provision that hearing impaired  employee cannot get promotion of 3% as per the court  order to physically handicapped as per Supreme Court  order. He wants the information under RTI Act?

Grounds for the Second Appeal:

1
The CPIO has not provided the desired information. Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:­ Appellant:  Present in  person  through  VC.    His  representative  did not turn up and the Appellant being deaf and dumb was not  in a position to speak.
Respondent: Not present.
Interim order:
Fresh date of hearing to be fixed and appellant/respondent to  be   informed.     Commission   takes   very   serious   view   of   the  absence   of   the   CPIO   during   hearing.     Commission   issues  Show  Cause   notice  to   the   CPIO   for   his   absence   during   scheduled  hearing.
(Divya  Prakash  Sinha) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy (Raghubir Singh) Dy. Registrar/Designated Officer 2