Central Information Commission
Uma Kant Jha vs Indian Air Force on 8 November, 2024
केन्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ मागग, मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई निल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
File No : CIC/IAIRF/A/2023/135068
CIC/IAIRF/C/2023/135668
CIC/IAIRF/A/2023/136410
CIC/IAIRF/A/2023/136504
CIC/IAIRF/A/2023/135815
CIC/IAIRF/A/2023/137210
CIC/IAIRF/A/2023/138674
CIC/IAIRF/A/2023/138942
CIC/IAIRF/A/2023/138944
CIC/IAIRF/C/2023/140350
CIC/IAIRF/C/2023/141298
CIC/IAIRF/C/2023/141135
CIC/IAIRF/C/2023/142238
Uma Kant Jha .....अपीलकर्ाग /Appellant
....निकायर्कर्ाग /Complainant
VERSUS
बनाम
PIO,
HQ, Training Command, IAF Hebbal,
JC Nagar Post, Bangalore - 560 006 ....प्रनर्वािीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 17.10.2024
Date of Decision : 08.11.2024
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari
The above-mentioned Second Appeals/Complaints are clubbed together as
the parties are common and subject-matter is similar in nature and hence are
being disposed of through a common order.
Page 1 of 37
1. CIC/IAIRF/A/2023/135068
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 26.04.2023
CPIO replied on : 16.06.2023
First appeal filed on : 28.06.2023
First Appellate Authority's order : 26.07.2023
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 18.08.2023
Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 26.04.2023 seeking the following information:
1. एयर फोर्स टे क्निकल कॉलेज (AFTC) जालाहल्ली पक्चिम र्ुरक्षा की दृक्टट र्े अति र्ंवेदिशील है ।
(क) नया वहा पर प्रशशक्षण पािे वाले बच्िों को मोबाइल फोि रखिे का अधिकार है ? यदद हााँ िो कृप्या र्ाक्ष्य प्रस्िुि करें । (ख) नया AFTC के अंदर अधिकाररयों को मोबाइल फोि रखिे का अधिकार है ? यदद हााँ िो कृप्या र्ाक्ष्य प्रस्िुि करें । (ग) मदद फोि रखिे की अिुमति प्रशशक्षु िथा अधिकाररयों को है िो बाि करिे की अधिकिम र्मय र्ीमा िथा कौि र्ा र्मय तििासररि ककया गया है ?
2. मेरे मृिक पुत्र अंककि कुमार झा (208047-G) AE (P) 31T/ PC और SSC/98 AE का मोबाईल फोि िया लैपटॉप जो वायु र्ेिा के अधिकाररयों द्वारा अपिे पार् रख शलया गया था। कृप्या तिम्ि जािकारी दे िे का कटट करें ? (क) रक्जस्टर की कॉपी क्जर्में जमा की गई र्ामािों की र्ूिी हो। (ख) कब यह र्ामाि बच्िों को ददया गया और कब पुिः उर्र्े जमा कराया गया ।
3. अंककि कुमार झा के रूम र्े प्राप्ि र्भी र्ामािों की र्ूिी जो वायु र्ेिा के पार् उपलब्ि है।
4. आपके द्वारा ददिांक 23/09/22 को भेजी गिस ई. मेल का तिराकरण अभी िक नयों िहीं ककया गया है ।
Page 2 of 37(क) र्मय पर तिराकरण ि करिे वाले अधिकाररयों की हमें र्ूििा दी जाय?
(ख) नया ववभाग इर् बाि की जााँि करे गा कक अधिकाररयों पर ककर् तियम के अंिगसि कायसवाही होगी?
(ग) मांगी गई र्ूििा के तिराकरण की अंतिम तिधथ कारण र्दहि बिायें?
The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 16.06.2023 stating as under:
(a) As regards the information sought vide Para 1 of your RTI application, it is intimated that the information sought is in the nature of seeking clarifications and opinions from the CPIO and hence, beyond the scope of the word 'information' as defined in terms of Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, 2005. Hence, the undersigned is constrained from providing the information sought by you in the captioned paragraphs.
(b) As regards the information sought vide Para 2 and 3 of your RTI application, the Court of Inquiry is under process and disclosure of any information at this stage would likely to impede the process of investigation and same is exempted under Section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act, 2005.
(c) As regards the information sought vide Para 4 of your RTI application, no such information is available.
Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 28.06.2023. The FAA vide its order dated 26.07.2023, held as under.
1(क) कक, आर टी आई अधितियम, 2005 के मौजूदा प्राविािों के अिुर्ार, केवल वही जािकारी प्रदाि की जा र्किी है जो उपलब्ि हैं और लोकप्राधिकरण के पार् मौजूद या उिके तियंत्रणािीि हैं। र्ी पी आई ओ र्े ऐर्ी जािकारी र्क्ृ जि करिे की अपेक्षा िहीं की जािी जो ररकॉर्स का दहस्र्ा ि हो। उनि ववषय पर ददिांक 21 मई 2019 के श्री आजाद अंर्ारी बिाम र्ी पी आई ओ पंजाब र्ेंट्रल ववचवववद्यालय एवं र्ी आई र्ी/एर् बी/ए/2016/001025/र्ी बी ई र्ी ई-बी जे ददिांक 03 मािस 2017 के श्री र्ुब्रोिो गुहा राय बिाम र्ी पी आई ओ, र्ंयुनि आयुनि, महातिदे शक र्िकसिा के मामलो में भी इनहीं िथ्यों का र्मथसि ककया गया है। इि मामलों में माििीय र्ी आई र्ी िे कहा कक "आर टी आई अधितियम 2005 के प्राविािों के िहि केवल वही जािकारी प्रदाि की जा र्किी Page 3 of 37 है जो उपलब्ि एवं मौजूद हैं और लोकप्राधिकरण के पार् उपलब्ि या उिके तियंत्रणािीि हैं। र्ी पी आई ओ र्े ऐर्ी जािकारी र्क्ृ जि करिे की अपेक्षा िहीं की जािी जो ररकॉर्स का दहस्र्ा िहीं हैं। उनहें काल्पतिक प्रचिों की व्याख्या करिे या उत्तर दे िे की आवचयकिा िहीं है।
(ख) श्री कुलदीप कुमार बरिवाल बिाम मुख्य आयुनि, र्ीमा शुल्क के र्ी आई र्ी/र्ीर्ीईएमटी/ए2019/159448 ददिांक 29 अनटूबर 2021 के मामले में माििीय र्ी आई र्ी का वविार है कक अपीलकिास केवल ररकॉर्स के आिार पर स्पटटीकरण की मांग कर रहा है और वह ऐर्ी कोई जािकारी िहीं मांग रहा जो भौतिक रूप में उपलब्ि हो। स्पटटीकरण र्े र्ंबंधिि प्रचि आर टी आई अधिियम.. के अिीि अिुरक्षक्षि िहीं ककया जा र्किा। यह दे खा गया है अपीलकिास को आर टी आई अधितियम के अंिगसि र्ी पीआई ओ इि प्रचिों के उत्तर दे िे के शलए बाधिि िहीं है। इर्के अलावा आई टी आई अधितियम की िारा 2 (एफ) के अिुर्ार आवेदक को िथ्यों के कारण/र्ुझाव/परामशस केवल िब ददया जा र्किा है जब वह र्ावसजतिक प्राधिकरण के ररकार्स में उपलब्ि हो। र्ी पी आई ओ अपीलकिास द्वारा मांगी गई िरीके के अिुर्ार जािकारी र्क्ृ जि िहीं कर र्किा। र्ी पी आई ओ केवल कायासलय के ररकार्ों में उपलब्ि जािकारी के अिुर्ार ही र्ूििा प्रदाि करिे का र्ंिारक है । इर्शलए उर्र्े िथ्यों पर शोिकायस कर उर्की आपूतिस करिे की अपेक्षा िहीं की जा र्किी है ।
2. िथा जबकक, माििीय र्ी आई र्ी के फैर्ले पर र्ी पी आई ओ िे स्पटट प्रस्िुि ककया कक लोकप्राधिकरण केवल उर् जािकारी को प्रदाि करिे के शलए बाध्य है जो उर्के पार् उपलब्ि है या कफर आर टी आई अधितियम 2005 के र्ांववधिक र्ीमाओं के भीिर स्वीकायस है । आगे, लोकप्राधिकरण र्े आर टी आई आवेदक द्वारा मांगी गई र्ूििा को र्क्ृ जि करिे की अपेक्षा िहीं की जािी है जो अनयथा उपलब्ि ि हो। इर्शलए, ित्काल अपील पर कोई कारसवाई शेष िहीं है।
3. िथा जबकक, र्ी पी आई ओ द्वारा प्रस्िुि आर टी आई आवेदिों के उत्तर, ित्काल अपील में आपके द्वारा प्रस्िुि िकस, उनि िकों पर र्ी पी आई ओ की प्रस्िुतियां, ररकॉर्स में उपलब्ि वववरण और ऊपर की गई ििासओं र्दहि र्ंपूणस िथ्यात्मक मुद्दों पर वविार करिे के बाद अिोहस्िाक्षरर का यह वविार है कक र्ी पी आई ओ द्वारा आपके आर टी आई ददिांक 26 अप्रैल 23 के आवेदि पर तिपटाि आर टी आई अधितियम 2005 के मौजूदा प्राविािों के अिुर्ार है और इर्में कोई हस्िक्षेप िहीं ककया जा र्किा है।
4. अब इर्शलए, उनि ििासओं के अिुर्ार ित्काल अपील का तिपटाि ककया गया है।
Page 4 of 372. CIC/IAIRF/C/2023/135668 Relevant facts emerging from complaint:
RTI application filed on : 03.07.2023 CPIO replied on : 08.08.2023 First appeal filed on : Nil First Appellate Authority's order : Nil 2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 23.08.2023 Information sought:
The Complainant filed an RTI application dated 03.07.2023 seeking the following information:
1. अंककि कुमार झा (208047-G) का शर्िम्बर 2022 का माशर्क बेिि बैंक के ककर् खािे में जमा ककया गया था।
2. अंककि कुमार झा को शर्िम्बर 2022 में ककििे ददिों का वेिि ददया गया था।
उपरोनि र्ंबंधिि अशभप्रमाणणि दस्िावेज तिगसि ककये जाए /
3. आजकल वायु र्ेिा में आत्महत्या की घटिाएाँ बहुि बढ़ रही है इर् र्ंबंि में हमें तिम्िशलणखि र्ि ू िाएं दे िे की कृपा करें ।
(a) वषस 2020 (जिवरी 01 र्े 31 ददर्म्बर), वषस 2021 (जिवरी 01 र्े 31 ददर्म्बर) वषस 2022 (जिवरी 01 र्े 31 ददर्म्बर) मैं ककििे वायु र्ैतिक अधिकारी (पुरुष एवं मदहला) िे आत्महत्या की।
(b) प्रचि 3(a) में शभनि आयु वगस के अिुर्ार जािकारी प्रदाि करिे की कृपा करें
(i) 20 र्े 25 वषस के बीि (ii) 25 र्े 30 वषस के बीि
(iii) 30 र्े 40 वषस के बीि
4. वायु र्ेिा के ककर् तियम के अंिगसि प्रशशक्षु/ अधिकारी को COI के उपरांि भी कॉपी िहीं दी जािी है कृप्या तियम की र्त्यावपि प्रति भेजिे का कण्ट करें ।
5. pmc ऑकफर्र्स मेष AFTC बंगलौर के अंिगसि प्रशशक्षु द्वारा जो राशश जमा कराई जािी है ककर् मद में ककििी राशश जमा करिे की अिुमति है यह Page 5 of 37 जािकारी वषस 2020 2021 2022 िथा 2023 बिािे की कृपा करें िथा उर्र्े र्ंबंधिि दस्िावेज (अशभप्रभाणणि) दे िे की कृपा करें ।
6. अंककि कुमार का (208047-G) का शर्िम्बर माह 2022 में मेष में जमा की गर राशश का वववरण दें िथा मेष जमा बबल की अशभप्रमाणणि प्रति दे िे का कप्ि करें (मेष र्े र्ंबंधिि)
7. आकफर्र्स मेष AFTC जालाहल्ली पक्चिम बंगलोर की Audit Report 2020, 2021,2022 की दे िे की कृपा करें ।
The CPIO vide letter dated 08.08.2023, informed the Complainant as under:
"1. Refer your RTI application dated 03 Jul 23, received at this HQ on 12 Jul 23, on transfer from Directorate of Personal Services, Air HQ (Vayu Bhawan) for the Para 1, 2, 5, 6 & 7.
2. The information sought vide your RTI application is given below:-
(a) As regards the information sought vide Para 1 and 2 of your RTI application. you are seeking information related to the payment details of the late UTFO Ankit Kumar Jha, of September 2022 which are held by the Air Force Central Accounts Office (AFCAO), New Delhi which is closely related to last addressee. Hence, para 1 & 2 of your RTI application is hereby transferred under Section 6(3) of the RTI Act, 2005. You are requested to make further correspondence directly with the last addressed for the information of Para 1 and 2.
(b) As regards the information sought vide Para 5, 6 and 7 of your RTI application, it is intimated that the Officers' Mess is a Non-Public Fund and the same does not fall within the ambit of "public authority" as provided under Section 2(h) of the RTI Act, 2005. Hence, such non-public fund does not come within the scope of 'public authority' as defined in terms of Section 2(h) of the RTI Act, 2005. Therefore, the information relating to Officers' Mess is not accessible by undersigned by virtue of any law for the time being in force. Considering the aforesaid, the undersigned is constrained from disclosing any information in this regard.
3. If you are not satisfied with this reply, you may prefer an appeal to the First Appellate Authority within 30 days of having received this letter, at the address given below."
3. CIC/IAIRF/A/2023/136410 Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 06.04.2023 CPIO replied on : 13.06.2023 First appeal filed on : 28.06.2023
First Appellate Authority's order : 03.08.2023 2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 29.08.2023 Page 6 of 37 Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 06.04.2023 seeking the following information:
As per your reply having letter. No- TC/C 9627/1/ CDs dated 08.02.23 of my application under section 76 of TEA, 1872 of Sr. No- (3) Para(g) the COI regarding death of Ankit Kumar Jha (208047-G) AE (M) is on progress. Being an Indian citizen I want the following information under RTI Act 2005.
1. what is progress report of COI?
2. Can a low rank officer be appointed presiding officer to examine truth related as COI of higher rank officers?
(a) If yes, please provide copy of letter or IAF rule / IPC CrPC rule.
3. Any Chance was given to father / mother/relatives of Ankit Kumar Jha for Cross Examination with the persons named in FIR 0096/2022
(a) If yes, to whom ?
(b) If no, reason for this ?
4. Can any person made blame worthy 4 before starting COI.
(a) If yes, attach a copy of rule of IAF or any officer order?
5. Can all personal hidden information may be collected by presiding officer of COI of complainant or witness?
(a) if yes, attach rule of IAF or any office order.
The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 13.06.2023 stating as under:
(a) As regards the information sought vide Para 1 of your RTI application, the Court of Inquiry is under process and disclosure of any information at this stage would likely to impede the process of investigation and same is exempted under Section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act, 2005.
(b) As regards the information sought vide Para 2, 3, 4 and 5 of your RTI application, it is intimated that the information sought is in the nature of seeking clarifications and opinions from the CPIO and hence, beyond the scope of the word 'information' as defined in terms of Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, 2005. It is pertinent to mention that, the RTI Act does not cast on the public authority any obligation to answer queries in which the petitioner attempts to elicit answers to their questions. The applicant's right extends only to seeking information as defined in the Act, either by pointing to the file, document, paper or record etc., or by mentioning the type of information as may be available with the specified public authority. Hence, the undersigned is constrained from providing the information sought by you in the captioned paragraphs.Page 7 of 37
Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 28.06.2023. The FAA vide its order dated 03.08.2023, held as under.
1. िथा जबकक, पररशशटट 1,2,3 िथा 4 पर वविार करिे हुए, यह मि है कक आर टी आई आवेदि पर र्ी पी आई ओ द्वारा ददए गए जवाब में हस्िक्षेप िहीं ककया जा र्किा है और िदिुर्ार अंतिरम अपील को महत्वहीि माििे हुए इर्का तिपटाि ककया जाए।
2. िथा जबकक, र्ी पी आई ओ द्वारा प्रस्िुि आर टी आई आवेदिों के उत्तर, ित्काल अपील में आपके द्वारा प्रस्िुि िकस , उनि िकों पर र्ी पी आई ओ की प्रस्िुतियां, ररकॉर्स में उपलब्ि वववरण और पररशशटट 1,2,3 िथा 4 पर वविार करिे के बाद अिोहस्िाक्षरर का यह वविार है कक र्ी पी आई ओ द्वारा आपके आर टी आई ददिांक 06 अप्रैल 23, 15 अप्रैल 23, 19 अप्रैल 23 िथा 09 मई 23 के आवेदि पर तिपटाि आर टी आई अधितियम 2005 के मौजूदा प्राविािों के अिुर्ार है और इर्में कोई हस्िक्षेप िहीं ककया जा र्किा है।
3. अब इर्शलए, उनि ििासओं के अिुर्ार ित्काल अपील का तिपटाि ककया गया है ।
4. CIC/IAIRF/A/2023/136504 Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 15.05.2023 CPIO replied on : 11.06.2023 First appeal filed on : 28.06.2023
First Appellate Authority's order : 03.08.2023 2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : Nil Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 15.05.2023 seeking the following information:
I am a citizen of India. I am a father of Ankit Kumar Jha (208047-G). I need following information under RTI Act 2005.
1. Under which rule of RTI Act it is provision to intimate the applicant that your "IPO is not in order" after more than 30 days?Page 8 of 37
2. specify the rule of IPC / RTI Act 2005 in which there is no provision of getting copy of Complaint ted as per your letter No. AFTC/927/1/PI (RTI) dated 16/02/23 para 2(c)
3. As per your reply through letter ND-TC/9619/1/ 808/P1 dated 15/12/22, the reply given by you in para 2, S. No- 1.2, 3 are Correct.
(i) If yes, was it examined from the concerned offer?.
(ii) of no reason there after?
4. Air Force Rule under which Ankit Kumar Jha (208047-6) was not provided leave for the year 2001 and 2022.
5. specify the rule of IAF under which Tahira Rahman (209092-F) was granted leave named in FIR 0096/2022 U/S 3022-34 Please give specific copy.
6. Any IAF rule for leave is applicable for all or for individual.
7. please provide certified Copy of letter signed by my son and ordered by AFTC officer to "Leave the Campus" on 21/09/22 at 17:30 [Ankit kumar Jha, S.NO-208047(6), AECM)]
8. As per your letter No-AFTC/927/1/PI(RTI) dated 16/02/23, The COI is under process. please reply the following.
(a) Chance was given to Father of Ankit Kumar Jha to Cross examine the culprits?
If yes, enclose proof.
If reason for this.
9. When COI was completed?
The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 11.06.2023 stating as under:
The information sought vide your RTI application is given below:-
(a) As regards the information sought vide Para 1 of your RTI application, it is intimated that the information sought is in the nature of seeking clarifications and opinions from the CPIO and hence, beyond the scope of the word 'information' as defined in terms of Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, 2005. Hence, the undersigned is constrained from providing the information sought by you in the captioned paragraphs.
(b) As regards the information sought vide Para 2 of your RTI application, no such information is available.
(c) As regards the information sought vide Para 3 of your RTI application, no funds were demanded/collected from trainees.
(d) As regards the information sought vide Para 4 of your RTI application, Late UTFO Ankit Kumar Jha was granted leave on Mid-course leave after Stage -II from AFTC along with other batch mates from 27 Dec 21 to 09 Jan 22 i.e. 14 days.Page 9 of 37
(e) As regards the information sought vide Para 5, 6 and 7 of your RTI application, no such information is available.
(f) As regards the information sought vide Para 8 and 9, the Court of Inquiry is. under process and disclosure of any information at this stage would likely to impede the process of investigation and same is exempted under Section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act, 2005.
Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 28.06.2023. The FAA vide its order dated 03.08.2023, held as under.
1. िथा जबकक, र्ी पी आई ओ िे इर् कथि आदे श के पररशशटट 1,2,3 िथा 4 के िहि आपके क्रमशः 06 अप्रैल 23, 15 अप्रैल 23, 19 अप्रैल 23 िथा 09 मई 23 के आर टी आई आवेदिों पर अपिी प्रस्िुतियां दी है ।
2. िथा जबकक, पररशशटट 1,2,3 िथा 4 पर वविार करिे हुए, यह मि है कक आर टी आई आवेदि पर र्ी पी आई ओ द्वारा ददए गए जवाब में हस्िक्षेप िहीं ककया जा र्किा है और िदिुर्ार अंतिरम अपील को महत्वहीि माििे हुए इर्का तिपटाि ककया जाए।
3. िथा जबकक, र्ी पी आई ओ द्वारा प्रस्िुि आर टी आई आवेदिों के उत्तर, ित्काल अपील में आपके द्वारा प्रस्िुि िकस , उनि िकों पर र्ी पी आई ओ की प्रस्िुतियां, ररकॉर्स में उपलब्ि वववरण और पररशशटट 1,2,3 िथा 4 पर वविार करिे के बाद अिोहस्िाक्षरर का यह वविार है कक र्ी पी आई ओ द्वारा आपके आर टी आई ददिांक 06 अप्रैल 23, 15 अप्रैल 23, 19 अप्रैल 23 िथा 09 मई 23 के आवेदि पर तिपटाि आर टी आई अधितियम 2005 के मौजूदा प्राविािों के अिुर्ार है और इर्में कोई हस्िक्षेप िहीं ककया जा र्किा है।
4. अब इर्शलए, उनि ििासओं के अिुर्ार ित्काल अपील का तिपटाि ककया गया है ।
5. CIC/IAIRF/A/2023/135815 Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 19.04.2023 CPIO replied on : 16.06.2023 First appeal filed on : 28.06.2023
First Appellate Authority's order : 03.08.2023 2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 24.08.2023 Page 10 of 37 Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 19.04.2023 seeking the following information:
(1) As per your letter No TC 19619). dated 16/12/22, the requisite information mentioned in para (2) is not received up to this dare.
(a) Give reason of delay.
(b) Apply rule of RTI Act 20 (1) and 20 (2) against the responsible person. (2) Under the Jurisdiction of whom AFTC officials 2 the trainees were allowed to collect the fund. for giving, gift to officers of AFTC during pop on 08/09/22.
(3) mess is a non public Fund by it is govern elf by the AFTC officers. please provide IAF rule Under which It w permitted that beyond rule can be collected ?
(4) As per RTI Act 2005, section 21 (J), sub section (i), (ii), (iii) and (iv), I want to examine all records members along with my expert team. (Records of Medicals, Records of Mess, dossier record, CCT footage records of dated 19/07/22 to 30/07/22, Records of CCT footage of mess and other relevant documents) please make necessary arrangement and intimate me accordingly on and wait for my confirmation. My email is Umaaparna 1992 @gmail.com.
The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 16.06.2023 stating as under:
The information sought vide your RTI application is given below:-
(a) As regards the information sought vide Para 1 of your RTI application, the reply was provided vide Para 2 of our letter No. TC/9619/1/808/P1 dated 30 May 23 (copy annexed).
(b) As regards the information sought vide Para 2 of your RTI application, no such information is held with public authority.
(c) As regards the information sought vide Para 3 of your RTI application, no such information is available.
(d) As regards the information sought vide Para 4 of your RTI application, you may inspect the documents which have been already provided against your previous RTI applications. Further, the information pertaining to Records of Medicals, Mess, Dossier, CCT Footage records is not clear and specific, hence is vague. Therefore, you are hereby to clearly specify the documents which you need to inspect, thereafter as per provisions of RTI Act, 2005 you will be provided access. You may intimate the suitable dates (3 different dates from Monday to Friday) for the inspection of the documents.Page 11 of 37
Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 28.06.2023. The FAA vide its order dated 03.08.2023, held as under.
1. िथा जबकक, र्ी पी आई ओ िे इर् कथि आदे श के पररशशटट 1,2,3 िथा 4 के िहि आपके क्रमशः 06 अप्रैल 23, 15 अप्रैल 23, 19 अप्रैल 23 िथा 09 मई 23 के आर टी आई आवेदिों पर अपिी प्रस्िुतियां दी है ।
2. िथा जबकक, पररशशटट 1,2,3 िथा 4 पर वविार करिे हुए, यह मि है कक आर टी आई आवेदि पर र्ी पी आई ओ द्वारा ददए गए जवाब में हस्िक्षेप िहीं ककया जा र्किा है और िदिुर्ार अंतिरम अपील को महत्वहीि माििे हुए इर्का तिपटाि ककया जाए।
3. िथा जबकक, र्ी पी आई ओ द्वारा प्रस्िुि आर टी आई आवेदिों के उत्तर, ित्काल अपील में आपके द्वारा प्रस्िुि िकस , उनि िकों पर र्ी पी आई ओ की प्रस्िुतियां, ररकॉर्स में उपलब्ि वववरण और पररशशटट 1,2,3 िथा 4 पर वविार करिे के बाद अिोहस्िाक्षरर का यह वविार है कक र्ी पी आई ओ द्वारा आपके आर टी आई ददिांक 06 अप्रैल 23, 15 अप्रैल 23, 19 अप्रैल 23 िथा 09 मई 23 के आवेदि पर तिपटाि आर टी आई अधितियम 2005 के मौजूदा प्राविािों के अिुर्ार है और इर्में कोई हस्िक्षेप िहीं ककया जा र्किा है।
4. अब इर्शलए, उनि ििासओं के अिुर्ार ित्काल अपील का तिपटाि ककया गया है ।
6. CIC/IAIRF/A/2023/137210 Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 03.04.2023 CPIO replied on : 14.06.2023 First appeal filed on : 24.06.2023 First Appellate Authority's order : Nil 2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 24.08.2023 Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 03.04.2023 seeking the following information:
Page 12 of 37It is requested to provide urgent Copy of the following public documents which are present in my In your custody regarding death of date Ankit Kumar Jha (208047-G) (1) Reply of so cause notice having letter No AFTC/C 2500/1/P1/Trg (BM-11) dated 30 June 22 by my son Ankit Kumar Jha (2) Certified Copy of dossier (3) Certified Copy of initial medical board at the time of Joining the service.
(4) Certified copy of letter dated 09/09/22 approving termination of Ankit
Kumar Jha
(5) letter dated 5 14/09/22 for termination
(6) Date un which movement order issued to his batch mates individually.
(7) Copy of receipt of the fees issued to VTU
(8) Complete details of Expenditure taken against Extra messing and daily
messing.
(9) Mess bill for the month of sept 2022.
(10) Mess bill during stay at Dundigad, Hydrabad. (11) Copy of the letters regarding collection of illegal money for giving gift from trainees to AFTC. (Name of the trainees and name of officers under which the collection was made) illegal collection by the officers / trainees is allowed.
(12) List of the seizure memo of Ankit Kumar Jha Kept with IAF/AFTC. (13) Reason of taking my all personal hidden information by Mr. Gupta ji having mobile NO- by M 97175 17488 on the name of Col.
The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 14.06.2023 stating as under:
1. The information sought vide your RTI application is given below:-
(a) As regards the information sought vide Para 1 of your RTI application, the reply of Show Cause Notice dated 30 Jun 22 has been forwarded to you in reply of Para 2(a) of your RTI application dated 05 Apr 23 vide our letter No. TC/9619/1/808/P1 dated 24 May 23.
(b) As regards the information sought vide Para 2 of your RTI application, the dossier has been forwarded to you in reply of Para 2(b) of your RTI application dated 05 Apr 23 vide our letter No. TC/9619/1/808/P1 dated 24 May 23.
(c) As regards the information sought vide Para 3 of your RTI application, the information sought is closely related to Air HQ (VB), the application is hereby transferred under section 6(3) of the RTI Act, 2005 for disposal in accordance with the RTI Act. You are requested to make further correspondence directly with the last addee for ibid para.
(d) As regards the information sought vide Para 4 of your RTI application, no such information is available.
Page 13 of 37(e) As regards the information sought vide Para 5 of your RTI application has been provided to you in reply of your RTI application dated 05 Apr 23 vide our letter No. TC/9619/1/808/P1 dated 24 May 23.
(f) As regards the information sought vide Para 6 of your RTI application, movement order issued on 08 Jul 22.
(g) As regards the information sought vide Para 7 of your RTI application, is annexed as Annexure 1.
(h) As regards the information sought vide Para 8, 9 and 10 of your RTI application, it is intimated that the Officers' Mess is a Non-Public Fund and the same does not fall within the ambit of "public authority" as provided under Section 2(h) of the RTI Act, 2005. Hence, such non-public fund do not come within the scope of public authority' as defined in terms of Section 2(h) of the RTI Act, 2005. Therefore, the information relating to Officers' Mess is not accessible by undersigned by virtue of any law for the time being in force. Considering the aforesaid, the undersigned is constrained form-disclosing any information in this regard.
(i) As regards the information sought vide Para 11 of your RTI application, no such information is available.
(j) As regards the information sought vide Para 12 of your RTI application has been provided to you in reply of your RTI application dated 05 Apr 23 vide our letter No. TC/9619/1/808/P1 dated 24 May 23.
(k) As regards the information sought vide Para 13 of your RTI application no such information is available.
7. CIC/IAIRF/A/2023/138674 Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 09.05.2023 CPIO replied on : 16.06.2023 First appeal filed on : 28.06.2023 First Appellate Authority's order : Nil 2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 19.09.2023 Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 09.05.2023 seeking the following information:
1. Kindly provide certified copy of the Routine order Unit Routine order for Convening the Court of Inquiry vis-a-vis UTFO Askil Kumar Jha S.No-
(208047-60) AE (M) of 208/21T/PC2sse /98 AEC.
Page 14 of 372. Certified copy of the complaint preferred by UTFO Tahira Rahaman (209092-F) AE (L) of 209/217/ pe &SSC of an AEC acknowledge by later.
3. Kindly Count the total number of days taken by you for giving the reply of my RTI application by you in the following letter Number (Give your answer in No. of days).
(i) TC/C 9622/1/CDS dated 08/02/23.
(ii) TC/9619/1/808/P1 dated 15/18/22
(iii) AFTC 1927) 1/ PI (RTI) dated 06/02/23.
(iv) TC/9619/1/808/8, dated 28/18/22.
(v) TC/ 4619) 1/808/p1 dated 27/12/22
(vi) TC/9619/1/808/P1 dated 16/12/28.
(vii) TC/9619)1/808/11 dated 15/12/22
(viii) Te/9619/1/808/P1 dated 15/12/20
(ix) TC/9619) 1/808/P1 dated 16/12/22.
(4) please provide following information as per the following data w.e.f. Jan 2021 to Dec. 2028. Separately for Training Candidates as well as for officer's mess.
(a) For Training Candidates
(i) No. of trained candidates in year 2021 (Jen to Dec) and 2022 (Jon to Dec).
(ii) No. of Gardeners appointed
(iii) No. of Dhobis appointed
(iv) No of Barbers. appointed
(v) No. of Cobblers. appointed.
(b) Above information from S.No. (1) to (v) tor officers mess also.
The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 16.06.2023 stating as under:
1. The information sought vide your RTI application is given below:-
(a) As regards the information sought vide Para 1 of your RTI application, the Court of Inquiry is under process and disclosure of any information at this stage would likely to impede the process of investigation and same is exempted under Section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act, 2005.
(b) As regards the information sought vide Para 2 of your RTI application, undersigned is constrained to provide the said complaint as this information is held with the public authority in fiduciary relationship and no larger public interest justifying such disclosure. Hence, this information is exempted from disclosure in terms of Section 8(1)(e) of the RTI Act, 2005.
(c) As regards the information sought vide Para 3 of your RTI application, with respect to your previous numerous RTI applications is not readily available with this Public Authority. Further, compilation of information if Page 15 of 37 attempted would disproportionately divert the resources of this Public authority as per Section 7(9) of RTI Act, 2005. Hence, the undersigned is constrained from providing the information sought by you in the captioned paragraph.
(d) As regards the information sought vide Para 4 (a) of your RTI application, it is intimated that the same is likely to reveal details pertaining to manpower and employed manpower in a defence establishment.
Accordingly, considering that disclosure of such information is likely to be prejudicial to the security of the State, hence, the information sought is exempt from disclosure in terms of Section 8(1)(a) of the RTI Act, 2005. Further, as regards the information sought vide Para 4(b) of your RTI application, it is intimated that the Officers' Mess is a Non-Public Fund and the same does not fall within the ambit of "public authority" as provided under Section 2(h) of the RTI Act, 2005. Hence, such non-public fund do not come within the scope of 'public authority' as defined in terms of Section 2(h) of the RTI Act, 2005. Therefore, the information relating to Officers' Mess is not accessible by undersigned by virtue of any law for the time being in force. Considering the aforesaid, the undersigned is constrained from disclosing any information in this regard.
Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 28.06.2023. The FAA reply is not on record.
8. CIC/IAIRF/A/2023/138942 Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 05.04.2023 CPIO replied on : 16.05.2023 First appeal filed on : 26.06.2023 First Appellate Authority's order : Nil 2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 20.09.2023 Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 05.04.2023 seeking the following information:
1. With all due respect it is submitted that I am father of the deceased person UTFO Ankit Kumar Jha (208047-4) branch AE(M) 208/21T/PC and SSC/98 AE Course
2. It is further Submitted that I may please be provided the certified copy of documents mention here in after.Page 16 of 37
(a) Reply of so cause notice of letter No AFTC/C 3500 1/ P1/ Trg (BM-11) dated 30/06/22.
(b) certified copy of dossier.
(C) Certified copy of letter dated 07/09/22 approving termination of Ankit Kumar The
(d) Certified copy of letter dated 14/09/28 for termination
(e) Account Audit report of PMC officer's mess AFTC for the year 2021, 2022.
(f) mess Bill for the month of sept 2022 of Ankit K. Jha.
(f) Receipt of the gift given by batchmates of Ankit to AFTC which was illegally collected by the instruction of AFTC
(g) Movement order of batchmates of Ankit after POP on 08/07/22
(h) Certified copy of the letter in which there is Provision of serving Liquor to the trainee's officers
(i) List of the seizure memo of Ankit Kumar Jha and Vipin Dabas residing in room E-05/ E-07.
(K) Certified Copy of vigilance Clearance in respect of Tahira Rahman and Swaraj.
(j) Complete details of fund taken against extra messing and daily messing date wise (certified copy)
(m) Pass book of SBI of Ankit Jha kept in your custody.
(n) Receiving letter of complaint given by Tahira Rahman by Ankit kumar Jha.
(o) Certified copy of Transfer/promotions letters of the person in FIR NO.
0096/2022 U/S 302 & 34.
(P) use of public fund in respect of persons in FIR NO. 0096/2022.
The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 16.05.2023 stating as under:
As regards the information sought vide your RTI application, the instant reply may be considered as an interim reply and the requisite information is being collated from concerned public authority at AFTC. Information, as made available and permissible for disclosure, would be expeditiously provided in terms of RTI Act, 2005.
The information sought vide your RTI application is given below:-
(a) As regards the information sought vide Para 2(a) of your RTI application, the reply of Show Cause Notice is annexed as Annexure 1.
(b) As regards the information sought vide Para 2(b) of your RTI application is annexed as Annexure 2. Further, the name and signature of the concerned authorities, being personal information and exempt from Page 17 of 37 disclosure under Section 8(1)(j) of RTI Act, 2005, has been severed of in terms of Section 10 of the RTI Act, 2005.
(c) As regards the information sought vide Para 2(c) of your RTI application, no such information is available at AFTC.
(d) As regards the information sought vide Para 2(d) of your RTI application is annexed as Annexure 3.
(e) As regards the information sought vide Para 2(e), 2(f) and 2(1) of your RTI application, it is intimated that the Officers' Mess is a Non-Public Fund and the same does not fall within the ambit of "public authority" as provided under Section 2(h) of the RTI Act, 2005. Hence, such non-public fund do not come within the scope of 'public authority' as defined in terms of Section 2(h) of the RTI Act, 2005. Therefore, the information relating to Officers' Mess is not accessible by undersigned by virtue of any law for the time being in force. Considering the aforesaid, the undersigned is constrained form disclosing any information in this regard.
(f) As regards the information sought vide Para 2(g) of your RTI application, there is no provision to have receipt of the gifted items and hence the said information is not available with the concerned public authority.
(g) As regards the information sought vide Para 2(h) of your RTI application, the Movement Order of batch mates of Late Ankit Jha contain details of the defence officers which will likely reveal the movement of the defence officers and their deployment at various Air Force establishments. The disclosure of such information would be prejudicial to the security of the State and hence is exempt from disclosure in terms of Section 8(1)(a) of the RTI Act, 2005.
(h) As regards the information sought vide Para 2(i) of your RTI application, no such information is available.
(i) As regards the information sought vide Para 2(j) of your RTI application is annexed as Annexure 4. Whereas, no information is available in respect of Vipin Dabas.
(j) As regards the information sought vide Para 2(k) of your RTI application, no such information is available.
(k) As regards the information sought vide Para 2(m) of your RTI application, no such information is available.
(l) As regards the information sought vide Para 2(n) of your RTI application, undersigned is constrained to provide the said complaint as this information is held with the public authority in fiduciary relationship and no larger public interest justifying such disclosure. Hence, this information is exempt from disclosure in terms of Section 8 1(e) of the RTI Act, 2005.Page 18 of 37
(m) As regards the information sought vide Para 2(0) of your RTI application, it contains details of personnel which would likely to reveal the employability of such Defence personnel. The disclosure of such information would be prejudicial to the security of the State and hence is exempt from disclosure in terms of Section 8(1)(a) of the RTI Act, 2005.
(n) As regards the information sought vide Para 2(p) of your RTI application, the information sought is vague and cannot be commented.
Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 26.06.2023. The FAA order is not on record.
9. CIC/IAIRF/A/2023/138944 Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 11.04.2023 CPIO replied on : 17.06.2023 First appeal filed on : 26.06.2023 First Appellate Authority's order : Nil 2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 20.09.2023 Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 11.04.2023 seeking the following information:
मैं भारि का एक वररटठ िागररक हूाँ। मैं ददवंगि अंककि कुमार झा [(208047-G),ब्रांि AF(M) 208/31T/ PC&SSC/98 AE] का वपिा हूाँ। मैं र्ूििा के अधिकार अधितियम 2005 का उपयोग करिे हुए तिम्िशलणखि र्ूििाएाँ िाहिा हूाँ।
1 जब अंककि की मौि की र्ूििा 21/07/22 को अधिकारी को दी गई थी िो ककि ककि अधिकाररयों िे ए. एफ. लिी खीर का दौरा ककया था? 2 वायु र्ेिा के ककर् तियम के अंिगसि यह प्राविाि कक मृिक व्यक्नि के पररजिों की र्ूििा र्ही र्मय पर िहीं दी जाय? (दस्िावेज र्ंलग्ि करें ) 3 एयर फोर्स पुशलर् िे FIR नयो िही दजस कराई? (आवचयक दस्िावेज र्ंलग्ि करे ) 4 एयर फोर्स पुशलर् िे ककर् तियमों के अंिगसि बबिा पुशलर् के पहुाँिे आवचयक कायसवाही की। (आवचयक दस्िावजे र्ंलग्ि करे ) Page 19 of 37 5 आपके E mail ददिांक 23/09/2022 के क्रम र्ंख्या (2) में ददए गए दस्िावेजों की प्रति हमें कब िक प्राप्ि होगी? (ई.मेल र्ंलग्ि) 6 जो भी व्यक्नि इर्के शलए दोषी है उर्के ववरुद्ि नया-नया कायसवाही हो र्किी है। उर्का हमे ब्योरा प्रदाि करें 7 यदद कमसिारी कमसिारी के के ववरुद्ि कायसवाही करिी होिी हमें ककर् अधिकारी र्े र्ंपकस करिा होगा, कृप्या यह भी बिािे की कृपा करें ?
The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 17.06.2023 stating as under:
The information sought vide your RTI application is given below:-
(a) As regards the information sought vide Para 1 and 2, no such information is available.
(b) As regards the information sought vide Para 4 of your RTI application, is annexed as Annexure 1.
(c) As regards the information sought vide Para 3, 5, 6 and 7 of your RTI application, it is intimated that the information sought is in the nature of seeking clarifications and opinions from the CPIO and hence, beyond the scope of the word 'information' as defined in terms of Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, 2005. Hence, the undersigned is constrained from providing the information sought by you in the captioned paragraphs.
Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 26.06.2023. The FAA order is not on record.
10. CIC/IAIRF/C/2023/140350 Relevant facts emerging from complaint:
RTI application filed on : 29.08.2023 CPIO replied on : Nil First appeal filed on : Nil First Appellate Authority's order : Nil 2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 20.09.2023 Information sought:
The Complainant filed an RTI application dated 29.08.2023 seeking the following information:
Page 20 of 371. Form IAFF (F) 1518 forwarded to Air HQ, DPO-3 along with the service documents. [Form p(55),p( 40),P(48) [now Farm AFMS-1 etc]
2. Instruction Manual laid down AFO 176/97 (Certified copy)
3. Disposal of Forms 1371/1371(G) the Order of copy for Directorate of Training. Directorate of Personnel and DRDO
4. As per letter NO. ALX HQ/99803/26/DAV (Adm) dated 34/06/21 guide live given in the Support to Nok in case of service death / Battle and non battle Casualties, please provide the following documents.
(a) Letter of appointment of Nodal officer/ WO: Unit representative to solve the Problems of Nok matter related to NE benefits or for other assistance.
(b) Copy of letter by Aoc/stn cdr co to ensure all requisite assistance to Nok by the support of the last unit.
(c) Copy of letter for appointment of Nodal Agency at Air HR DAS / DAV
(d) Copy of letter for detailing a Liaison officer immediately on occurrence of the causality to assist NOK by the parent unit given as per time line
5. Copy of documents submitted by Parent unit for initial reporting [Appendix 'A' Refers to para 6(b)] of ACT HQ 199803/26/ DAV III (Adm) dated 24/06/21
6. Copy of documents submitted by parent unit for EX GARTIA payment [Appendix 'B' refers to para 6(c) of Air HQ/99803/26/DAV III adm dated 24/06/21.
7. Copy of the letters of documents containing "First Remarks by chief of the air staff [Appendix F (Refers to para 8 of Air HQ/99803/26/DAV III adm, dt 24/06/21]
8. Certified copy of mess bill for the month of sept 22 and Amount of mess Bill Paid to AFTC by Aneit Kumar Jha.
9. Copy of IAF rule of SOP for termination of training of officers.
10. Copy of SOP followed in the case of Ankit Kumar Jha during the stay at AFTC for the month w.e.f. 01/5/28 to 21/09/22 by the AFTC officials.
11. Copy of IAF rule /DOPT Circular in which there is provision of not providing or stopping of facilities which was provided earlier during stay at AFTC When COI is on progress.
12. Give me Certified "copy of IAF Jul/DOPT order office order in which officers and training Candidate are allowed to Keep mobile phone with him at AFTC Campus Jalahalli west, Bangalore.
13. please give me the copy of office order in which COI was establish after death of Ankit Kumar Jha.
14 Give me copy of IAF rule in which during COI Can be posted anywhere but no leave can be granted during COI.Page 21 of 37
15. with respect to the NO Air HA/9803/25) DAV (adm) dated 24/06/21 in the case of Causality of (any person) Ankit Kumar Jha 208047-G), provide the following certified copy
(i) Action taken by Parent unit
(ii) Action ta by DTO
(iii)Action taken AFCAO
(iv) Action take DAV FP(0)
(v) Action taken by DAV-II (C)
(vii) Action taken by DCDA (AF) The CPIO during the hearing has informed the bench that their office has not received the instant RTI Application from the Complainant.
11.CIC/IAIRF/C/2023/141298 Relevant facts emerging from complaint:
RTI application filed on : 17.08.2023 CPIO replied on : 21.09.2023 First appeal filed on : Ni First Appellate Authority's order : Nil 2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 11.10.2023 Information sought:
The Complainant filed an RTI application dated 17.08.2023 seeking the following information:
(1) अंककि कुमार का (208047-G) 21.09.2022 को शाम 5:30 बजे िक र्क्षम अधिकारी के तिदे शािुर्ार AFTC जालाहल्ली पक्चिम कैम्पर् खाली करिे का तिदे श ददया गया था जबकक ankit का रे लवे ररजवेशि 22/09/23 को शाम मे कराया गया था।
(क) उपरोनि तिदे श की प्रति क्जर् पर अंककि का हस्िाक्षर वो हमें दी जाय ।
(ख) अंककि कुमार को 24 घंटे जो ठहरािे की व्यवस्था की गई थी उर् होटल का बुककंग प्रति दी जाय।
(2) अंककि कुमार का के हत्या के उपरांि COI का गठि ककया गया था।
(क) उर् वायु र्ेिा का तियम उपलब्ि कराया जाय क्जर्के िहि एक शर्ववशलयि की हत्या का COI का गहि करिे का अधिकार हो।
Page 22 of 37(ख) COI में जो पीड़िि पररवार था उर्को शाशमल िहीं ककया गया था। कृत्या वायु र्ेिा तियम की प्रति प्रदाि की जाय।
(ग) COI गठि के अंिगसि "Terms and Reference" की प्रति दी जाय । (3) AFTC जालाहल्ली पक्चिम र्ुरक्षा की दृक्टट र्े अधिकाररयों िथा प्रशशक्षणाथी को वायु र्ेिा के अंिगसि एक िहीं बक्ल्क 2 फोि रखिे का अधिकार हैं। कृत्या र्ंबंधिि की प्रमाणणि प्रति दी जाय (4) जब भी ककर्ी केनरीय कमसिारी का स्थािानिरण एवं प्रोनिति दी जािी है िो केंरीय र्रकार के तियमािुर्ार Vigilance Clearance" की प्रकक्रया पूरी की आिी है।
(क) प्रथम र्ूििा ररपोटस में िाशमि व्यनि को वायु र्ेिा के ककि तियमों के िरख स्थािानिरण र्वस प्रोनिति दी गयी (र्ाक्ष्य प्रस्िुि करें ) (ख) माििीय ड़र्प्टी कमांर्ट े AFTC को ककर् तियम के अंिगसि VRS/ या र्ेवा तिवतृ ि दी गई। र्ाक्ष्य प्रस्िुि करें ।
(5) कायासलय के तिदे शािुर्ार अंककि कुमार का के आवेदि पर 24 अधिकाररयों का हस्िाक्षर है क्जर्िे यह प्रमाणणि ककया है कक अंककि का कौई भी राशश बकाया िहीं है लेककि शर्िम्बर माह का मेष बबल िहीं ददया गया है । कृया उधिि दस्िावेज प्रस्िुि करें । (6) मेष एक" Non public Fund" है इशर्शलए उर्र्े र्ंबंधिि तियम की प्रति र्ंलग्ि क्जर्में वायु र्ेिा अधिकाररयों का पूणस स्वाशमत्व है ।
The CPIO vide letter dated 21.09.2023, informed the Complainant stating as under:
"1.
Refer your RTI application dated 17 Aug 23, received at this HQ on 22 Aug 23.
2. The information sought vide your RTI application is given below:-
(a) As regards the information sought vide Para 1 of your RTI application, no such information is available where late UTFO Ankit Kumar Jha has signed any such letter.
Further, information pertaining to provide accommodation for 24 hours to the late UTFO Ankit Kumar Jha is also not available.
(b) As regards the information sought vide Para 2 (a) and (b), no such information is available. Whereas, information pertaining to Para 2(c), the Court of Inquiry is under process and disclosure of any information at this stage would likely to impede the process of investigation and same is exempted under Section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act, 2005.
Page 23 of 37(c) As regards the information sought vide Para 3 of your RTI application, no such information is available.
(d) As regards the information sought vide Para 4 of your RTI application, is vague. The details of officer on the appointment of Dy Comdt, AFTC may be provided to seek the information.
(e) As regards the information sought vide Para 5 of your RTI application, it is intimated that the Officers' Mess is a Non-Public Fund and the same does not fall within the ambit of "public authority" as provided under Section 2(h) of the RTI Act, 2005. Hence, such non-public fund does not come within the scope of 'public authority' as defined in terms of Section 2(h) of the RTI Act, 2005. Therefore, the information relating to Officers' Mess is not accessible by undersigned by virtue of any law for the time being in force. Considering the aforesaid, the undersigned is constrained from disclosing any information in this regard.
(f) As regards the information sought vide Para 6 of your RTI application, no such information is available."
12.CIC/IAIRF/C/2023/141135 Relevant facts emerging from complaint:
RTI application filed on : 28.08.2023 CPIO replied on : 29.09.2023 First appeal filed on : Nil First Appellate Authority's order : Nil 2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 10.10.2023 Information sought:
The Complainant filed an RTI application dated 28.08.2023 seeking the following information:
(1) कथि आदे श र्ंख्या 15/2023 ददिांक 19/07/23 प्रति दी जाय । (2) कथि आदे श र्ंख्या 15/2023 ददिांक 19/07/23 की प्रति जो भेजी गई उर्की रक्जटट्री क्रमांक र्ंख्या एवं ददिांक र्दहि प्रमाण भेजा जाय । (3) ए. एफ. टी. र्ी. जालाहल्ली पक्चिम में प्रशशक्षण पािे वाले अधिकारी को र्रकार द्वारा जो भी फंर् ददये जािे है उर्के आय एवं व्यय का ब्योरा ददया जाय िथा दस्िावेजो की अशभप्रमाणणि प्रति दी जाय । (4) अंककि कुमार का (208047-G) को AFTC में ठहरिे के दौराि जो भी धिककत्र्ा की गई थी उर्की र्ंपूणस मेड़र्कल ररपोटस की अशभप्रमाणणि प्रति प्रदाि की जाय Page 24 of 37 (5) ददिांक 08/09/2022 को POP के दौराि क्जििे भी अशभभावक िे AFTC का दौरा ककया था उर् रक्जटट्रर की अशभप्रमाणणि प्रति प्रदाि की जाय (6) COI के गठि की प्रकक्रया की आदे श प्रति/ भारिीय वायु र्ेिा के तियम/ DOPT आदे श की प्रति दी जाय क्जर्में COI के गठि की प्रकक्रया का क्जक्र हो ।
(7) वायु र्ेिा के तियम अपिा कायासलय आदे श की प्रति दी जाय क्जर्में ककर्ी अधिकारी के प्रति शशकायि होिे के बाद भी उच्ि रैंक प्रिाि करिा, स्थािानिरण दे िा िथा प्रमोशि शाशमल हो ।
(8) वायु र्ेिा के आदे श या कायासलय आदे श की प्रति की आय क्जर्में बबिा " vigilance clearance" के प्रोनिति िथा स्थािानिरण करिे का प्राविाि है ।
(9) वायु र्ेिा के आदे श या ककर्ी भी कायासलय आदे श की कॉपी दी जाय क्जर्में ककर्ी appointing Authority को छोिकर वायु र्ैतिक अधिकारी को dismiss करिे का अधिकार प्राप्ि हो।
(10) अंककि कुमार झा को जो VTU र्े र्दटस कफकेट ददया गया है उर्की original कॉपी आवेदक को दी जाये (11) वायु र्ेिा के आदे श या लतियम की प्रति दी जाय क्जर्में केनरीय लोक र्ूििा अधिकारी प्रथम अपीलीय अधिकारी को यह अधिकार ददया गया हो कक प्रस्िुि दस्िावेजों पर ककर्ी भी अधिकारी का हस्िाक्षर ि हो।
The CPIO vide letter dated 29.09.2023 has informed the Complainant stating as under:
"1. Refer your RTI application dated 28 Aug 23, received at this HQ on 01 Sep 23.
2. The information sought vide your RTI application is given below:-
(a) As regards the information sought vide Para 1 of your RTI application, copy of Speaking Order has already been provided against your first appeal dated 28 Aug 23 vide this HQ letter No. TC/709/20/50/SOA dated 29 Sep 23.
(b) As regards the information sought vide Para 2 of your RTI application, the Speaking Order No. 15/23 dated 19 Jul 23 was sent through normal post and no registration details are available.
(c) As regards the information sought vide Para 3 of your RTI application, no such information is available.
(d) As regards the information sought vide Para 4 of your RTI application, the said medical documents are related to the Inquiry in process and are also sub-judice. The Page 25 of 37 disclosure of any information at this stage would likely to impede the process of investigation and same is exempted under Section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act, 2005.
(e) As regards the information sought vide Para 5 of your RTI application, no such information is available.
(f) As regards the information sought vide Para 6 of your RTI application, it is intimated that the process of assembly of the Court of Inquiry is provided in the Chapter VI of Air Force Rules 1969, which is available in public domain.
(g) As regards the information sought vide Para 7, 8, 9 and 11 of your RTI application, no such information is available.
(h) As regards the information sought vide Para 10 of your RTI application, it is intimated that VTU certificate is issued to the trainee officer on the completion of their training and in the case of late UTFO Ankit Kumar Jha, the VTU certificate was not issued due to non-completion of training."
13.CIC/IAIRF/C/2023/142238 Relevant facts emerging from complaint:
RTI application filed on : 18.08.2023 CPIO replied on : 21.09.2023 First appeal filed on : Nil First Appellate Authority's order : Nil 2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 18.10.2023 Information sought:
The Complainant filed an RTI application dated 18.08.2023 seeking the following information:
(1) भारिीय वायु र्ेिा के तियम आईपीर्ी/ र्ीआरपीर्ी तियम की प्रति प्रदाि की जाय क्जर्में COI में ककर्ी तिम्ि रैंक के अधिकिी को उच्ि करिे के शलए पीठार्ीि अधिकारी के रूप में िाशमि ककया गया हो। (2) वायु र्ेिा के ककर् तियम के अिुर्ार एफ आई आर 0096/2022 में उक्ल्लणखि व्यक्नि के र्ाथ पू ही एफ भी अंकफि र्ंबंधियों को क्रॉर् एनर्ामीि करिे का मौका िहीं ददया गया (3) वायु र्ेिा का तियम प्रिाि ककया जाय क्जर्में जााँि अदालि आरं भ होिे र्े पहले ककर्ी बायु र्ैतिक अधिकारी को दोषी ठहराया गया हो। (4) भारिीय वायु र्ेिा का तियम या कायासलय आदे श की प्रति प्रदाि की जाय क्जर्मे पीठार्ीि र्ेिा अधिकारी द्वारा शशकायिकरिा या गवाह र्े र्ंबंधिि गुप्ि जािकारी र्ंग्रह का प्राविाि हो ।Page 26 of 37
(5) भारिीय वायु र्ेिा के तियम या कायासलय आदे श की प्रति प्रदाि की आय क्जर्में एक शर्ववशलयि ही हत्या में COI गठि करिे का अधिकार प्राप्ि हो।
(6) कायासलय आदे श या भारिीय वायु र्ेिा के तियम की प्रति प्रदाि की जाय क्जर्में कोई भी व्यक्नि जााँि अदालि का दहस्र्ा ि होि दए ू भी जााँि को प्रभाववि कर र्किा है ।
(7) प्रशशक्षण कमाि मुख्यालय भा॰वा॰ र्े॰ हेब्बाल जे र्ी. िगर पोस्ट बेंगलूर में (क) कुल ककििे केनरीय लोक र्ूििा पदाधिकारी की तियुक्नि वषस 2022 िथा 2023 में की गई है ।
(ख) प्रचि र्ंख्या (क) में वणणसि ककििे केनरीय लोक र्ूििा पदाधिकारी को र्ूििा अधिकार अधितियम 2005 के शलए प्रशशक्षण ददए गए है । (वषस 2022 िथा 2023) (ग) उपरोनि कायासलय में ककििे प्रथम अपीलीय अधिकारी की तियुवषि की गई है (वषस 2022 िथा 2023) (8) वायु र्ेिा तियम या आदे श की प्रति दी जाय क्जर्में माली की र्ंख्या, िोबी की र्ंख्या, िाई की र्ंख्या िथा मोिी की र्ंख्या जाििे र्े राज्य की र्ुरक्षा के शलए हातिकारक शर्ि हो र्किा है। (AFTC बंगलोर, (9) वायु र्ेिा तियम या आदे श की प्रति दी जाये क्जर्में AFTC बंगलोर जालाहल्ली में प्रशशक्षण पािे वाले अधिकारी िथा प्रशशक्षण दे िे वाले अधिकारी द्वारा ििल्ले र्े मोबाईल फोि का इस्िेमाल करिे र्े " राज्य की र्ुरक्षा के शलए खिरा िहीं है की पुक्टट होिी है (10) वायु र्ेिा आदे श की प्रति दी आये क्जर्म प्रथम अपीलीय अधिकारी को यह अधिकार प्रदाि ककया गया हो कक उिके तिणसय पर ददए गए दस्िावेज पर हस्िाक्षर ि ककये जाए।
(11) केनरीय लोक र्ूििा अधिकारी के किसव्यो की अशभप्रमाणणि प्रति प्रदाि की जाय।
(12) माििीय केनरीय लोक र्ूििा अधिकारी द्वारा र्ूििा का अधिकार अधितियम 2005 की िारा (4) में वणणसि की प्रगति ररपोटस आवेदक को प्रदाि की जाय।
Page 27 of 37(13) वायु र्ेिा के आदे शों की प्रति प्रदाि की आप क्जर्में यह रुपटट हो कक आर टी आई अधितियम 2005 की िारा 7(9) के अिुर्ार लोक प्राधिकरण के र्ंर्ाििों का दरु ु पयोग ककया गया है ।
The CPIO vide letter dated 21.09.2023, informed the Complainant stating as under:
"1. Refer your RTI application dated 18 Aug 23, received at this HQ on 23 Aug 23.
2. The information sought vide your RTI application is given below:-
(a) As regards the information sought vide Para 1 of your RTI application, the information pertaining to Air Force Rules/IPC/CRPC is available in public domain, whereas information pertaining to nomination of junior officer as Presiding Officer is not available. However, it is pertinent to mention that the information sought at Para 1 is in the nature of seeking answer of the queries from the CPIO and hence, beyond the scope of the word 'information'. Hence, the undersigned is constrained from providing the information sought by you in the captioned paragraphs.
(b) As regards the information sought vide Para 2, 3, 6 and 8 of your RTI application, it is intimated that the information sought is in the nature of seeking answer of the queries from the CPIO and hence, beyond the scope of the word 'information' as defined in terms of Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, 2005. It is pertinent to mention that the RTI Act does not cast on the public authority any obligation to answer queries in which the petitioner attempts to elicit answers to their questions. The applicant's right extends only to seeking information as defined in the Act, either by pointing to the file, document, paper or record etc., or by mentioning the type of information as may be available with the specified public authority. Hence, the undersigned is constrained from providing the information sought by you in the captioned paragraphs.
(c) As regards the information sought vide Para 4, 5 and 12 of your RTI application, is vague and is in a questionnaire form.
(d) As regards the information sought vide Para 7 of your RTI application, the appointment of First Appellate Authority and CPIO is held by the officers of the Indian Air Force and to provide any data in this regard would reveal security related details of defence establishment. The disclosure of such information is likely to be prejudicial to the security of the State and hence, is exempt from disclosure in terms of Section 8(1)(a) of the RTI Act, 2005. Further, during the year 2022 and 2023, four legal qualified officers had held the appointment of CPIO, out of which two have done course on RTI.
(e) As regards the information sought vide Para 9, 10 and 13 of your RTI application, no such information is available.
(f) As regards the information sought vide Para 11 of your RTI application, the charter of duties of CPIO is annexed as Annexure 1
3. If you are not satisfied with this reply, you may prefer an appeal to the First Appellate Authority within 30 days of having received this letter, at the address given below.
Page 28 of 37Senior Officer-in-Charge Administration HQ. Training Command, IAF Hebbal, JC Nagar Post, Bangalore-560 006 Tele 080-23410981/7500"
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Present in person.
Respondent: Shri Divakar Tomar, CPIO, attended the hearing through VC.
The Appellant stated that he is not satisfied with the information provided by the Respondent qua the instant RTI Application. He further reiterated the contents of his written submission dated 07.10.2024 which has been taken on record. The relevant extract of the same is as under:
"उपरोनि ववषय र्े र्ंबंधिि ददिांक 17/10/24 को मुझे 18 अपील/ शशकायिों की र्ुिवाई हेिु पत्र प्राप्ि हुआ है । र्ूििा का अधिकार का अथस है पारदशशसिा जवाबदे ही िथा िागररकों के मौशलक अधिकारों को रक्षा। इर् र्ंबंि मे मैं तिम्िशलणखि बािें माििीय अदालि के र्ामिे आवचयक कायसवाही हे िु प्रस्िुि कर रहा हूाँ/ 1 मेरे द्वविीय अपील की र्ुिवाई हे िु ववड़र्यो ररकॉड़र्िंग (Video Recording) की व्यवस्था की जाय। यदद इर्में कोई व्यविाि है िो मुझे शलणखि में र्ूधिि ककया जाय कक ककर् तियम िथा ककर् िारा के अिुर्ार मुझे मेरे अधिकारों र्े वंधिि ककया जा रहा है । 2 मेरे अपील की र्ुिवाई खुली अदालि (open Court) में की जाय िथा मैं भी अपिा एक प्रतितिधि (पक्षकार) रख र्कूाँ।
3 र्ूििा का अधिकार अधितियम की िारा 18 (3) के अंिगसि आपको शर्ववल कोटस की शक्नि है अिः िारा 18(3) की उपिारा (a), (b), (c), (d), (e) िथा (1) को केनरीय र्ुििा पदाधिकारी िथा प्रथम अपीलीय अधिकारी पर यथाशीघ्र लागू की आय ।
4 र्ूििा का अधिकार अधितियम की िारा 7/8) की अिारा (1) के अंिगसि केनरीय लेक र्ूििा अधिकारी िथा प्रथम अपीलीय अधिकारी द्वारा आवेदक को जािबूझकर, द्वेषपूवक स फैर्ला या तिणसय शलया गय गया है । इिहोिे ववभाग में कायसरि दोषी अधिकाररयो को बििे के शलए षियंत्र रिा है व जो कक र्ूििा अधिकार अधितियम की िारा 18(1) की उपिारा (c), (e) िथा (f) का उल्लंघि ककया है । उनहोंिे र्ूििा ि दे िे का कोई आिार बिाकर भारिीय दं र् र्ंदहिा (आई पी र्ी) की िारा 219 के िहि एक गंभीर अपराि काररि ककया है । 5 प्रथम अपीलीय अधिकारी िथा केनरीय र्ूििा अधिकारी द्वारा आवेर्दक को जो भी जबाब शमला है वह ि िो हस्िाक्षररि है िथा पत्र की तिधथ एवं पत्र परे शाि मे काफी अंिर है ।
अिः भौतिक रुप र्े उष ररपोटस की जााँि की जाय ।
Page 29 of 37
6 ककर्ी भी र्ूििा को अस्वीकार (rejection) करिे की ििास केवल र्ूििा अधिकार अधितियम
की िारा (8) िथा (9) में ही वणणसि है और ककर्ी अनय िाराओं में िहीं । अिः आवेदक
को र्ूििा दे िे का आदे श पाररि ककया जाय ।
7 र्ूििा का अधिकार अधितियम की िारा 2(f) के अिुर्ार आवेदक को र्ूििा शमलिी िादहए
जो कक िारा 4(1) (b) (iii, iv, v) का उल्लंघि है ।
प्राथसिा
1 केनरीय लोक र्ूििा अधिकारी िथा प्रथमअपीलीय अधिकारी को यथाशीघ्र र्मि भेजा
जाय िथा भौतिक रूप र्े उपक्स्थि होिे काआदे श पाररि ककया जाय 2 आवेदक को जो भी दस्िावेज ददये जाए वो अशभप्रमाणणि हो।
3 बबलम्ब र्े प्राप्ि र्ूििा िथा दस्िावेजों की उधिि जांि की जाय क्जर्में आवेदक की
उपक्स्थति अतिवायस हो।
4 आवेदक को हुई शारीररक, मािशर्क िथा आधथसक क्षति पूतिस हे िु केनरीय लोक र्ूििा
अधिकारी/ प्रथम अपीलीय अधिकारी के वेिि र्े की जाय िथा इर्का पालि र्ुतिक्चिि
कराया जाय।
5 केनरीय र्ूििा अधिकारी िथा प्रथम अपीलीय अधिकारी की प्रतिपरीक्षा (Cross Examination)
हे िु भौतिक रूप र्े उपक्स्थि होिे का आदे श पाररि ककया जाय। 6 केनरीय र्ूििा अधिकारी िथा प्रथम अपीलीय अधिकारी द्वारा र्ूििा का अधिकार अधितियम की िारा 4(b), 7(1) 18(1) [(a), (b), (c), (e), (f)] िथा अनय िाराओं के उल्लंघि वेिु िारा 20(1) िथा 20 (2) को अशभलम्ब लागू की जाय और उर्का पालि र्ुतिक्चपि कराया जाय।
7 केनरीय र्ूििा अधिकारी िथा प्रथम अपीलीय अधिकारी द्वारा अपिे पद का गलि इस्िेमाल करिे, ववदष ु पूणस फैर्ला करिे, आवेदक को क्षति पहुाँििे, दस्िावेजों में हे रा फेरी करिे, षर्यंत्र रििे िथा तियम की अवहे लिा करिे के शलए भारिीय दं र् र्ंदहिा की िारा 166, 167, 217, 218 िथा 219 जो भी उधिि हो कायसवाही करिे का आदे श पाररि ककया जाय।
8 आवेदक को र्भी र्ूििाएं 15 ददिों के अंदर बबिा शुल्क के दे िे का आदे श पाररि ककया जाय 9 प्रथम अपीलीय अधिकारी/ केनरीय लोक र्ूििा अधिकारी शपथ पत्र क्जर्में र्ूििा अधिकार अधितियम की िारा (8) के अंिगसि यह वणणसि हो कक "Information which cannot be denied to the parliament, or a state Legislature Shall not be denied to any person".
10 मामले की तिटपक्ष जााँि, ररकार्स का तिरीक्षण, प्रतिपरीक्षा िथा र्ंपूणस र्ुिवाई हे िु पयासप्ि
र्मय दी जाय।"
The Respondent submitted that a suitable and pointwise reply qua the instant RTI Application was given to the Appellant vide letter dated 16.06.2023. While explaining the brief background of the case, he apprised the bench that Ex-
Under Training Flying Officer (UTFO) Ankit Kumar Jha, deceased son of the Appellant had joined IAF on 01.02.2021 and reported to Air Force Technical College (AFTC) on 26.07.2021 for Stage-II training. During the course, a Page 30 of 37 complaint was received from a woman trainee officer, UTFO Tahira Rahman, on 30.06.2022, pertaining to stealing of her undergarments from her balcony by UTFO Ankit Kumar Jha. Accordingly, a search of his room was conducted by AFTC authorities, and a sizeable number of women undergarments were found in his possession. Thereafter, a Court of Inquiry was ordered to investigate the matter and the Court of Inquiry found UTFO Ankit Kumar Jha blameworthy on the following counts:
(a) Violating the gender related norms by infringing on a women trainee Officer's privacy.
(b) Stealing the undergarments of Women Trainee Officers from their room balcony.
(c) Violation of norms of personal conduct by visiting women trainee officers block which is out of bound for male trainee officers.
He further added that subsequent to the approval of the Court of Inquiry by the competent authority, a Training Review Board (TRB) was conducted at AFTC and the order for Termination of Training was issued by Air Headquarter 14.09.2022, based on the recommendations of the TRB which was duly concurred by Commandant AFTC and HQ Training Command, Bangalore. The termination of training and discharge order was handed over to the UTFO on 21.09.2022 by AFTC authorities after intimating his father i.e. the Appellant, telephonically. However, the ex-UTFO was found hanging from ceiling fan at about 1815 hours on 21.09.2022, in another unoccupied room of Venkatraman Block' at AFTC Officers Mess and a suicide note was recovered from his room. Since, it was a case of unnatural death, a Court of Inquiry was ordered by the Air Office Commanding-in-Chief (ADC-in-C) on 22.09.2022 to investigate the incident. Meanwhile, on 22.09.2022, an FIR was filed by the younger brother of the ex-UTFO Ankit Kumar Jha, Sub Lt. Aman Jha, an officer of the Indian Navy, wherein he alleged six IAF officers including UTFO Tahina Rahman were responsible for the murder of his brother.
The Commission interjected and asked the Respondent that what is the present status of proceedings before Court of Inquiry and FIR, to which he apprised the bench that the Court of Inquiry in the matter of the death of ex- UTFO Ankit Kumar Jha is held in abeyance since the case is under investigation by Civil Police, final conclusion in the case can be made only after receipt of PME and final closure report of Civil Police. With respect to present status of Page 31 of 37 FIR, he requested the bench to give two weeks' time to file additional written submission. The bench verbally directed the Respondent to file additional written submission informing the status of the averred case.
The Appellant interjected levelling allegations on the officer of Respondent Public Authority that he is not the CPIO and has no authority to attend the instant proceedings. In response to this, Shri B. Mishra, apprised the bench that he has been deputed as CPIO in the office and is duty bound to attend and plead the matter before the bench. The Appellant further added that no timely response has been provided by the Respondent and further alleged that there is mismatch in the dates of the replies given to the RTI Applications as per their dispatch register. He further requested the bench to cross-examine the officers during the hearing.
The Commission interjected and apprised the Appellant that under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005, cross-examination of the Respondent in the classical sense, as done in Courts, is not explicitly provided for. If the Appellant is dissatisfied with the response, he can submit his arguments before the bench in Second Appeal/Complaint which he has already submitted.
A written submission has been received from Shri Divakar Tomar, CPIO, vide letter dated 14.10.2024, a copy of which has been sent to the Appellant and the same has been taken on record. The relevant extract of the same is as under:
"Submission by CPIO on Second Appeal
(a) RTI application dated 26 Apr 23 filed by Shri Uma Kant Jha was replied by CPIO as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 on 16 Jun 23 (copy annexed).
(b) Appellant had filed first appeal on 24 Jun 23 against the reply of CPIO. The ibid first appeal was also disposed of by FAA vide Speaking Order No. 16/2023 dated 26 Jul 23 (copy annexed).
(c) As documents suggest, appellant has filed second appeal on 17 Aug 23 and asked information related to Col which has been denied as the matter is sub-judice before Assistant Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (ACMM) Bangalore.
(d) In view of the above, ibid second appeal may be disposed of accordingly, being devoid of merit."
In compliance with the verbal directions of the Commission, a copy of additional written submission has been received from Shri BN Ashok, CPIO, HQ Page 32 of 37 TC, vide letter dated 30.10.2024, a copy of which has been sent to the Appellant and the same has been taken on record. The relevant extract of the same is as under:
"Submission by CPIO on Second Appeal.
(a) 14 Second Appeals pertaining to CPIO, Head Quarter Training Command were planned on 17 Oct 24 before Hon'ble CIC Mr. Vinod Kumar Tiwari. While hearing the matter, Hon'ble CIC had given the verbal direction to submit the present status of criminal matter under FIR No. 96/2022. The case was taken up with Ganagammagudi Police Station, Bangalore City for status report and they have replied that matter is sub- judice before Hon'ble 8th ACMM Court (Reply of the Police station is annexed as Annexure-1).
(b) Information pertaining to Court of Inquiry.
(i) On 21 Sep 22, Ex-UTFO Ankit Jha was found hanging from ceiling fan in an unoccupied room of 'Venkatraman Block' at officers' Mess, Air Force Technical College (AFTC), Bengaluru. A Col was assembled on 24 Sep 22 pertaining to the unnatural death as mentioned above. Meanwhile, a FIR under Section 302, IPC was filed by Sub Lieutenant Aman Jha (brother of late Ankit Jha) against the officers of AFTC at Ganagammagudi Police Station, Bangalore City. The inquest report, death certificate and final investigation report have not been handed over by the Police to the Air Force authorities. The matter is still being investigated by the Police and final order of the ACMM Court is awaited (Please refer Annexure-l).
(ii) Section 8 (1) (h) of the RTI Act provides that notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders.
Hon'ble CIC in File No. CIC/AD/C/2010/000627, dated 13 Jun 11 wherein, it was held that the commission, on careful consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case is of the opinion that the information related to the ongoing DAR proceedings cannot be disclosed u/s 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act since any disclosure at this stage will impede the process of investigation that is still going on. The said proposition has been upheld in the case of Manjit Singh Vs Central Vigilance Commission, New Delhi wherein, the Hon'ble Commission held that it is of the view that the information sought by the appellant cannot be disclosed as it is exempted from disclosure as per Section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act, since the proceedings in the disciplinary case initiated against him have not reached a logical conclusion.
(iii) The applicant Mr Umakant Jha vide RTI applications dated 06 Apr 23 (136410), 26 Apr 23 (135068), 09 May 23 (138674), 15 May 23 (136504), 17 Aug 23 (141298), 28 Aug 23 (141135) had sought information pertaining to Col which was denied by the CPIO since the matter was being investigated by the Civil Police and final investigation report of the Civil Police is still awaited."
Decision:
Page 33 of 37The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both the parties and perusal of the written submissions, observes that a suitable replies in terms of RTI Act have been given to the Appellant. In compliance with the verbal directions of the Commission, the Respondent apprised the bench that a FIR No. 96/2022, is still pending under investigation by the civil police. Since, the inquest report, death certificate and final investigation report have not been handed over by the Police to the Air Force authorities, no information can be divulged at this stage to the Appellant being exempted under Section 8 (1) (h) of the RTI Act. It is also noted that matters pertaining to the civil Police of the State Government fall under the jurisdiction of State Information Commission concerned.
It is important to note that the information sought by the Appellant vide thirteen separate RTI Applications resulting in thirteen separate Second Appeals/Complaints relates to the same cause of action viz. death of UTFO Ankit Kumar Jha. During the hearing, the Commission is apprised of the fact that a FIR under Section 302, IPC, was filed by Sub Lieutenant Aman Jha (brother of late UTFO Ankit Jha) against the officers of AFTC at Ganagammagudi Police Station, Bangalore City, which is under investigation and final order of the ACMM Court is still awaited. The information sought by the Appellant is intrinsic to the dispute which is pending adjudication before the Court and local police authorities and hence, these are records which can be summoned by the concerned Court and thus, can be obtained by the Appellant following the relevant provisions of the concerned Court Rules. The judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the matter of The Registrar, Supreme Court of India vs R. S. Misra, dated 21.112017 in WP (C) 3530/2011, wherein J. Manmohan has held as under:
"xxx
54. This Court is further of the opinion that if any information can be accessed through the mechanism provided under another statute, then the provisions of the RTI Act cannot be resorted to as there is absence of the very basis for invoking the provisions of RTI Act, namely, lack of transparency. In other words, the provisions of RTI Act are not to be resorted to if the same are not actuated to achieve transparency.
xxx Page 34 of 37
58. A Division Bench of this Court in Prem Lata CPIO Trade Marks Registry, Delhi Vs. Central Information Commission & Ors., 2015 SCC OnLine Del 7604 in the context of accessing information from the Registrar of Trade Marks was concerned with the question whether information suo- motu being made available by a public authority through means of information including intervals in fulfillment of obligations under Section 4 of the Act can be requested for under Section 6 of the Act. For detailed reasons therein, it was held that neither can information already suo-motu made available by the public authority in discharge of obligations under Section 4(b) be requested for under Section 6 of the RTI Act nor the CPIO was required to reject the said request giving reasons. It was held that the purport of the RTI Act is to make the information available to the public at large and the same can be deciphered also from Section 44 of the RTI Act providing for dissemination of information in a cost effective and easy mode to the extent possible. Consequently, information which is already available under any other statutory mechanism will not be covered under the provision of the RTI Act.
59. In the present case, maintaining two parallel machinery: one under SCR and the other under the RTI Act, would clearly lead to duplication of work and unnecessary expenditure, in turn leading to clear wastage of human resources as well as public funds. Also, request for hard copies of information (as contemplated under Section 7 of the RTI Act) in respect of those information which are already available and accessible in the public domain, under the mechanism contemplated under the SCR, will further lead to unnecessary diversion of resources and conflict with other public interest which includes optimal use of limited fiscal resources."
The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, in the case of Chief Information Commissioner Vs. High Court of Gujarat and Another in (Civil Appeal No(S).1966-1967/2020(Arising out of SLP(C) No.5840 of 2015) vide its judgment dated 4thMarch, 2020 held as under:
43. ...When there is an effective machinery for having access to the information or obtaining certified copies which, in our view, is a very simple procedure i.e. filing of an application/affidavit with requisite court fee and stating the reasons for which the certified copies are required, we do not find any justification for invoking Section 11 of the RTI Act and adopt a cumbersome procedure. This would involve wastage of both time and fiscal resources which the preamble of the RTI Act itself intends to avoid.
44. We summarise our conclusion:--Page 35 of 37
............(ii) The information to be accessed/certified copies on the judicial side to be obtained through the mechanism provided under the High Court Rules, the provisions of the RTI Act shall not be resorted to.
In the light of facts of the case and the submissions made by the parties and in the light of the judgements of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi and the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, discussed hereinabove, the Commission finds that in the presence of an effective mechanism provided under the concerned Court Rules, the provisions of the RTI Act need not be resorted to. The Appellant who is already a party before the Court can obtain desired information through the established mechanism of the Court, without resorting to the RTI Act.
Before parting with the decision, this Commission wishes to note that the son of the Appellant has already lodged a FIR with the local police authority and the concerned matter is pending adjudication before the ACMM court and yet, the Appellant has filed these thirteen Second Appeals/Complaint, before the Central Information Commission, seeking redressal of the same subject matter which is already under adjudication before the ACMM Court. Such repetitive and parallel litigation is not necessary. It is further noted that the Complainant/Appellant has wilfully suppressed the replies provided by the CPIO while filing complaints. Thus, he has not approached the Commission with clean hands. The conduct is not appreciated.
In the light of the abovementioned directions and observations of the Court, this Commission finds it imperative to advise the Appellant to pursue the cases already pending adjudication before the competent forums instead of pursuing parallel litigation through the RTI machinery.
The appeals and complaints are disposed of accordingly.
Vinod Kumar Tiwari (विनोद कुमार वििारी) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयुक्त) Authenticated true copy (अनिप्रमानणर् सत्यानपर् प्रनर्) (S. Anantharaman) Page 36 of 37 Dy. Registrar 011- 26181927 Date Copy to:
The FAA, Senior Officer-in-Charge Administration HQ, Training Command, IAF Hebbal, JC Nagar Post, Bangalore-560 006 Page 37 of 37 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)