Niraj Kumar Saha vs Kolkata Port Trust on 23 May, 2023

[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Niraj Kumar Saha vs Kolkata Port Trust on 23 May, 2023

Bench: Saroj Punhani

                               के ीय सूचना आयोग
                        Central Information Commission
                            बाबागंगनाथमाग, मुिनरका
                         Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                          नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067


File No : CIC/KPTRS/A/2022/654829

NIRAJ KUMAR SAHA                                         ......अपीलकता/Appellant

                                      VERSUS
                                       बनाम
CPIO,
SPM Port, Personnel &
industrial Relations Division,
RTI Cell, Haldia Dock Complex,
Jawahar Tower, PO-Haldia
Township, East Midnapore, West
Bengal-721607.                                        .... ितवादीगण /Respondent

Date of Hearing                   :   19/05/2023
Date of Decision                  :   19/05/2023

INFORMATION COMMISSIONER :            Saroj Punhani

Relevant facts emerging from appeal:

RTI application filed on          :   20/07/2022
CPIO replied on                   :   Not on record
First appeal filed on             :   22/08/2022
First Appellate Authority order   :   Not on record
Second Appeal dated               :   11/10/2022

Information sought

The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 20.07.2022 seeking the following information:

"My recruitment was under the Mechanical & Electrical Engineering Department (M&EE Department) of Kolkata Dock System (KDS) under Syama Prasad Mookerjee Port Kolkata (SMPK). I had temporarily been transferred to Haldia Dock Complex (HDC) under office order no. Mech/C/2846 dated:29.10.2018. In the subsequent period of time, the temporary transfer was extended twice (02.11.2019 to 02.11.2020 and 02.11.2020 to 02.05.2021) and so the second (i.e. last) extension ended on 02.05.2021. The relevant extension orders are attached as Annexe-A, for your reference.

Regarding my temporary transfer from M&EE Dept. (KDS) to HDC, clarification is requested regarding the following points: -

1. Kolkata Port Trust Employee (Recruitment, Seniority and Promotion) Regulation 14 clause (2) states that the total period of appointment to a temporary post will not exceed the tenure of the post. Despite such regulation, why in my case it exceeds the tenure of the post that was six months mentioned in last extension order that had been ended on 02.05.2021.

2. In SMPK, what is the maximum tenure of a temporary transfer of a class-I officer from KOS to HDC and how many times can such a transfer be extended?

3. Further, I would like to know whether approval from competent authority was taken for continuation of my duties at HDC after expiration of last extension order no.P&IR/13/2/2020/1750 dated 16.11.2020.

4. It would be helpful if you could provide me with a copy of the approval made by the competent authority for the continuation of my duties at HDC after the expiration of my last extension.

5. if no approval of the competent authority was obtained for the continuation of my duty at HDC after expiration of the last extension, please confirm why I have not been released to my parent department (i.e. M & EE Dept of KDS ) till date."

Having not received any response from the CPIO, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 22.08.2022. FAA's order, if any, is not available on record.

Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.

Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:

The following were present:-

Appellant: Present through video-conference. Respondent: Arun Kumar, Sr. Dy. Manager (P & I Div.) & CPIO present through video-conference.

The CPIO submitted that a reply along with relevant information has already been provided to the Appellant on 28.12.2022. He further tendered his apology for not uploading a copy of the same on CIC's website to facilitate the bench.

To a query from the Commission, the Appellant affirmed the receipt of averred reply during the pendency of instant Appeal and is fully satisfied with it. He did not raise any further contention in the matter.

Decision:

Considering the above-mentioned submissions of the Appellant, the Commission finds no further intervention in the matter.

However, the CPIO is directed to upload a copy of his reply dated 28.12.2022 on the CIC's website for the purpose of record, immediately upon receipt of this order. He is further advised to ensure in future that his written submissions in response to cases before hearing of the Commission should reach or be uploaded on the CIC's website prior to 48 working/business hours from the date of hearing of matter.

The appeal is disposed of accordingly.

Saroj Punhani (सरोज पुनहािन) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स यािपत ित) (C.A. Joseph) Dy. Registrar 011-26179548/ [email protected] सी. ए. जोसेफ, उप-पंजीयक दनांक / 3

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Central Information Commission