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 2, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Anil Kumar Pandey vs Ordnance Factory Board on 12 June, 2020

                                  के       यसूचनाआयोग
                        Central Information Commission
                             बाबागंगनाथमाग, मु नरका
                         Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                         नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067

File No : CIC/OFBKO/A/2018/155855

Anil Kumar Pandey                                                ....अपीलकता/Appellant
                                           VERSUS
                                            बनाम
CPIO,
Ordnance Factory Board,
10-A, S.K. Bose Road,
Kolkata- 700001.                                           ...     तवाद गण /Respondent

RTI application filed on               :   09/05/2018
CPIO replied on                        :   26/06/2018
First appeal filed on                  :   30/06/2018
First Appellate Authority              :   07/08/2018
order
Second Appeal dated                    :   05/09/2018
Date of Hearing                        :   11/06/2020
Date of Decision                       :   11/06/2020
            सूचना आयु         :                  द    काश स हा
   INFORMATION COMMISSIONER :                        DIVYA PRAKASH SINHA

Information sought

:

The Appellant requested for necessary orders to review his answer script of one of the subjects he appeared for in the examination for the post of Chargeman (NT) under LDCE, 2010.
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
Appellant has prayed for reviewing his LDCE answer script. Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing: 1 The following were present:-
Appellant: Present through VC.
Respondent: Kumar Rama Krishana, Dy. Director & CPIO, Ordnance Factory Board, Kolkata present on phone.
Appellant stated that he is not satisfied with the reply of the CPIO and wants the Commission to intervene in settling his service related grievance. CPIO submitted that appropriate reply was provided to the Appellant on 26.06.2018.

Decision Commission observes upon perusal of facts on record that no information has been sought by the Appellant as per Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, rather he has sought the review of his answer script. Further, it may also be noted that the relief sought in Second Appeal is not maintainable under RTI Act.

The appeal is dismissed accordingly.

Divya Prakash Sinha ( द काश स हा) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अ भ मा णतस या पत त) Haro Prasad Sen Dy. Registrar 011-26106140/ [email protected] हरो सादसेन,उप-पंजीयक दनांक / Date 2