Central Information Commission
Mrudit Kumar vs Gnctd on 7 November, 2014
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
(Room No.315, BWing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi 110 066)
File No.CIC/DS/C/2014/000369SA
Appellant : Mr. Udit Kumar
Respondent : Bhai Parmanand Institute of
Business Studies, Delhi
Date of hearing : 21102014
Date of decision : 07112014
Information Commissioner : Prof. M. Sridhar Acharyulu
(Madabhushi Sridhar)
Referred Sections : Sections 3, 19(3)of the RTI
Act
Result : Appeal allowed/
Disposed of
The appellant is present. The Public Authority is represented by Dr. Amita Dev and Dr.
Girish Kumar Sharma, Bhai Parmanand Institute of Business Studies, GNCTD, Delhi.
FACTS:
2. The appellant filed RTI application on 1.3.2013 seeking information with regard to all the complaints filed against Mr. Udit Kumar and copy of all the reminders send to him, who made these different complaints, what are their castes, their names designations in the Dept in 1 which Mr. Udit was appointed etc. PIO replied on 4.4.2013, directed for inspection. Being unsatisfied with the information provided the appellant preferred First Appeal on9.4.2013. FAA replied on 13.5.2013, directing the PIO to provide the information. Claiming nonsatisfaction with the information provided, the appellant preferred Second Appeal before the Commission. Decision:
3. Both the parties made their submissions. The appellant is aggrieved that his contract appointment was not extended by the respondent authority. He has admitted that the respondent authority has sent the information, but he needs the names, adddresses and the phone numbers of those persons who have made complaints against him, including their castes, etc. When asked by the Commisison as to how many RTI applications were filed by him with the respondent authority, he replied he did not remember. The Principal of the Respondent Institute, submitted that the appellant has filed some 20 RTI applications which were replied by them and there are 3 other RTI applications in the pipeline. She has also submitted that all the copies of the documents asked by him were supplied. In spite of this, the appellant has been sending a plethora of reminders and other letters to the institute. He has also addressed all his letters and complaints to several Forums, including SC/ST Commisison. Vexed witht his kind of letters/reminders/RTI applications/complaints from the appellant, the respondent institute has constituted a 2Member Committee to decide what is the attitude of the appellant in harassing the management of the Institute.
4. Having heard the submissions from both the parties, the Commission concludes that this case is an example of misuse of RTI Act by the appellant. The Commisison also observes 2 that the appellant is harassing the management of the Institute, as they did not extend his contract appointment. The Commisison directs the Principal of the Institute to send a copy of the findings of the 2Member Committee consituted for this purpose, when completed and upload the same in their website and deal with the appellant's RTI applications accordingly by directing him to their web site.
5. With the above observations and directions, the Commisison closes the appeal.
(M. Sridhar Acharyulu) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy (Babu Lal) Deputy Registrar Address of the parties:
1. The CPIO under RTI, Govt.of Delhi Bhai Parmanand Institute of Business Studies, Shakarpur, Delhi110092
2. Shri Udit Kumar H.No.180, Pocket 18, Sector24, Rohini, Delhi110085 3
3. The Directorate of Training & Technical Education Muni Maya Ram Marg, Pitam Pura, NEW DELHI 4