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 0, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Mr.S Surjitsingh Baldevsingh vs Ministry Of Communications And ... on 23 October, 2012

                       CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                          Club Building (Near Post Office)
                        Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
                               Tel: +91-11-26101592

                                                                File No.CIC/LS/A/2011/004156/BS/1075

Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal:

Appellant                              :      Mr.      Sardar     Surjeet   Singh    Baldev   Singh
Bhawaniwale
                                                  Saint Sepoi Residence,
                                                  Nandigram Housing Society,
                                                  Near Bafna Over Bridge,
                                                  Nanded 431601

Respondent                                    :        CPIO & Executive Engineer
                                                  Department of Posts
                                                  Postal Civil Division,
                                                  Khadki, Pune - 411003,
                                                  Maharashtra

RTI application filed on               :      27/05/2011
PIO replied                             :       10/06/2011 & 15/07/2011
First appeal filed on                         :      25/07/2011
First Appellate Authority order        :      11/08/2011
Second Appeal received on                     :      28/10/2011

Information sought

& reply furnished:

Query No. I. How much Sanction /AA&ES has been issued by the PMG, Aurangabad for Project Arrow Phase-IV Osmanabad during the year 2010-I 1. Reply to Query No.1:
Rs.49,203+ 15,62,500-1-4,67,700/- totaling to Rs.20,79,403/- Query No2: Work of how much amount was done under Project Arrow Osmanabad under maintenance. Reply to Query No.2 : Reply available in reply to Query No.3. Query No.3 Please give Xerox copy of Hill and test check statement of the bill by AE/EE under project arrow Osmanabad.
Reply to Query No.3 Xerox copies of the bills of Project Arrow Osmanabad are enclosed alongwith test check statements. 201-37 sheets ( for two works) Query No.4 Give Xerox copy of the tour programme of EE Pune and Xerox coy of the TA Bills from 2008 to 2010 of EF Pune.
Reply to Query No.4 Xerox copies from 2008 to 2010 enclosed alongwith tour programme. TA Bill months : 2008 for Jan, Feb, May. June, August to Dec 08--9 months --47 pages 2009 : Jan, June July to Dec 09 -- 8 months -- 47 pages 2010 : Feb, March, June, Aug, Sep and Oct 2010--6 months --35 pages. Query No.5: Under which circular and notes the taxi bills were paid to EF during the year 2007 to 2010. Give details thereof including the bills of taxi used under Division. Reply to Query No.5 Taxi bills paid as per Circular enclosed. Xerox copy of final taxi bill is enclosed.
Page 1 of 5
Query No.6: Which company's silver foil lamination was used under project arrow Osmanabad counter work. Whether EE was given pre idea about that. Please give the copy of such pre intimation.
Reply to Query No.6: As per schedule item of the Agreement. Query No.7: Which company's plywood was used under project arrow Osmanabad counter work. Which engineer approved the same. Please give details of circulars etc. Reply to Query No.7 : As per schedule item of the Agreement. Query No.8 Which officer is responsible for surrendei4ng the finds for Maratwada Vikas Center for non performance of project arrow Osmanabad work as per schedule. Reply to Query No. S : No such type of funds received in this office. Query No.9 Whether work was curtailed and finished early in Osmanabad. Please give reasons thereof.
Reply to Query No.9 : All required work at site carried out. Query No.10 Whether logo board (display board) fitted as per specifications in the furniture under project arrow Osmanabad has been done. If not why tubelight were fitted therein. Give the reasons in details. Whether any deduction was made. Reply to Query Nol0.: Logo board executed as per Agreement Item. Query No.11: What is the tenure of the Junior Engineer (Civil) of the Nine Sub Division. What is the Policy of the Govt. regarding transfer. Give the authorized circular. How many JEs in sub division, Pune.
Reply to Query No. 11: As per circular enclosed.- 4 pages Query No.12 : Whether transfer order in respect of Junior Engineer Sub Division Pune is available. If so please give the copy.. Why he has not been relieved. Which officer is responsible for non relieving him. Please give details.
Reply to Query No.12: No transfer order received during the last one month. Query No.13: What was the place of transfer of Junior Engineer Pune Sub Division. Which officer was authorized to relieve him. Why it has been delayed. Give details and copy of the correspondence between the officers.
Reply to Query No.13 No transfer order received during the last one month. Query No.14: Why the payment of dummy counters at Tuijapur was not made even after directions of Superintending Engineer (Civil). Who is responsible for non --payment. Give details. Reply to Query No.14: No record pertaining to this is available in the office.
15) left blank by the applicant.

Query No.16: What work has been done in the premises of Ambejogai P0 under project arrow. Reply to Query No.16: Work done as per project arrow guidelines. Query No.17: Which material has been filled in the ground after carrying out drain at Ambejogai. Reply to Query No.17 No records available.

Query No.18: How many times EE visited work at Ambejogal. Who was the AE of that work. Which AE has signed the bill of payment. Under which authority AE has been given such power. And which directions were given by the AE to Contractor. Please give copy of the correspondence and details thereof.

Reply to Query No.18 . EE visit details are available in the Tour TA Bills enclosed. AE, Postal Civil Sub Division, Pune.

Query No. 19: Why the item has been deleted under Agreement No. I 7/EEP/PN/09- I 0 in Ambejogai project arrow. What is the basis of deletion of item. Reply to Query No. 19 : Information does not include Answer to the question 'Why' Page 2 of 5 Query No.20: Where the item included while making T.S. under tender process. Why they were not deleted before the tender process. Please give detail reasons. Reply to Query No.20 Information asked is incomplete. Query No.21: Please mention the Rule under CPWD manual stipulating deletion of such items. Reply to Query No.21: Information asked is incomplete. Query No.22: What are the points mentioned in the History sheet under Agreement No.1 7/EEPIPN/09- I 0 Please given Xerox copy thereof.

Reply to Query No.22 : No such History Sheet is covered under Agreement copy. Query No.23 . Date wise details of work carried under Agreement No.1 7/EEP/PN/09- 10 Reply to Query No.23 The stipulated date of commencement of work as per Agreement is 16-07- 2009 The stipulated date of completion of work as per Agreement is 14-08-2009. The date of first measurement of work done is 18-07-2009 The actual date of completion of work is 14-08-2009 Query No.25: Give Xerox copy of the site order book in respect of Osmanabad project arrow counterand maintenance work.

Reply to Query No.25 : No such record is available in this office. Query No.26: Which company's distemper was used in project arrow Osmanabad work. Whether deduction was made. Please give copy of the correspondence with contractor. Reply to Query No.26 : As per Agreement Schedule Item. Query No.27: Whether provision was made in the budget for shed and fiber sheet at Osmanabad. If not Please state the reasons. Which officer is responsible for negligence? Reply to Query No.27: Work was not executed due to lack of space as per directions from postal authorities.

Query No.28: Which tile was used in design in the work of Osmanabad project arrow. Which company tiles was taken in analysis for design. And which tile was used actually. Is test report available?

Reply to Query No.28. : Item was executed as per Agreement schedule item. Query No.29 : Why Clert top red lamination applied in counter work of Osmanabad. Why silver lamination not done. Please give a copy of the decision given to the contractor. Reply to Query No.29 : Information does not include Answer to the question 'Why' Query No.30. Please given addresses of DDG( Vigilance) and Director (Vigilance) with Phone numbers of the Postal Department. -

Reply to Query No.30 : DDG (Vigilance), Department of Posts, Dak Bhavan, New Delhi Telephone No.011-23096099 Query No.31: Why the payment was not made of dummy counter fixed at Tuijapur under project arrow.

Give reasons.

Reply to Query No.31: Information does not include Answer to the question 'Why' Query No.32 : How many EOT passed in Pune from 01/01/2008 to 0510512011. Give copies of EOT and EOT forms.

Reply to Query No.32: FOT Passed: 12 Nos. Xerox copies of EOT Forms (Part--I & II) enclosed Query No.33 Give copy of progress report in project arrow from year 2008 to 2011. Reply to Query No.33 : Not available Query No.34. Why items deleted under Agreement No. 14/EEP/PN/09-IO and I 5/EEPIPN/09-l0. Why payment was made subsequently of the same. What is the basis for making payment. Give details.

Reply to Query No.34. Information does not include Answer to the question.

Page 3 of 5

Grounds for the Second Appeal:

Unsatisfactory information has been provided.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present Appellant: Absent Respondent: Absent The appellant vide his RTI application dated 27/05/2011 sought various information as mentioned above. The CPIO, after receipt of fee of Rs.390/- towards cost of supply of information, had furnished a detailed reply vide letter dated 15/07/2011. The appellant is not present for making his submissions.
Page 4 of 5
Decision Notice:
After reviewing the appellant's RTI queries and reply thereto it appears that the relevant information has been provided to him.
The matter is closed.
This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
BASANT SETH Information Commissioner October 23rd, 2012 (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (RM) Page 5 of 5