Central Information Commission
Mr.Gopal Kumar vs Telecommunication Consultant India ... on 4 October, 2013
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26101592
File No. CIC/BS/A/2012/001553/3617
04 October 2013
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Gopal Kumar
H.No.2334, HB Colony,
Sector-4,
Rewari-123401
Haryana
Respondent : CPIO
Telecommunications Consultants India Ltd.
TCIL Bhawan,
Greater Kailash-I,
New Delhi- 110048
RTI application filed on : 21/06/2012
PIO replied on : 16/07/2012
First appeal filed on : 08/08/2012
First Appellate Authority order : 04/09/2012
Second Appeal received on : 01/10/2012
Information sought:
1- List of disadvantages, financial losses and all other losses when an employee works under deputation/Foreign Service in TCIL.
2- Mention all the advantages and disadvantages regarding promotional opportunity of a TCIL employee while on foreign project/service.
3- Mention the loss/financial losses due to foreign project/service, to a TCIL employee to avail promotional opportunity/process.
4- Mention the loss/financial losses due to foreign project/service, to a deputationist employee to avail promotional opportunity/process.
5- Provide following information related to promotional opportunity of a employee under depuration/foreign service in TCIL reg:-
(a) Is the employee considerable for the said opportunity?
(b) If he is required to attend the promotional process/test in home country then will the TCIL arrange at TCIL cost, to send the individual for it.
6- Provide all terms and conditions of deputation/Foreign Service which are mentioned/applied at the time of requirement/selection of staff from BSNL/MTNL. 7- Provide all terms and conditions of deputation/Foreign Service which are disclosed/applied at the time of forwarding the employee (deputationist) to foreign project/service. 8- Provide all above (Srl.6) at later stages also.
Page 1 of 39- The rate of deputation (duty) allows, alongwith all reference circulars/o.m. applicable. 10-Provide the following information related to "the deputation can be terminated by either side i.e. by the TCIL or the official with three months advance notice";
(a) Will the official born any financial loss/expenditure (like foreign to & fro airfare etc.) when termination is made by the TCIL side at any stage.
(b) Will the official born any financial loss/expenditure (like foreign to & from airfare etc.) when termination is made by the official side at any stage.
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
The PIO has not given the information claiming that it does not fall under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, 2005.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present Appellant: Mr. Gopal Kumar through VC Respondent: Mr. Kanwal Krishan CPIO The appellant stated that he wants copy of the guidelines/policy for deputation of staff to the TCIL and their further deputation to overseas projects. He further stated that he wants the guidelines/policy for promotion of staff sent on deputation to overseas project and requested that the term and condition applicable to an employee who is sent on overseas project deputation by the TCIL should be provided. He pointed out that the respondent should have supplied the copies of the documents requested in query 6, 7 & 8 within the time stipulated under the RTI Act and pleaded for initiating penal proceedings against the CPIO. The CPIO explained that they could not understand the specific information/documents sought by the appellant as it appeared from his RTI application that he was seeking information of interrogatory/clarificatory nature. The CPIO assured that the information as sought by the appellant above will be provided.
Decision notice:
The Commission directs the CPIO to provide the information as above to the appellant within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order. If thereafter, the appellant needs any further information relating to his RTI application dated 21/06/2012 the CPIO should permit him to inspect the relevant records and also allow him to take photocopies/extracts therefrom, free of cost, up to 25 pages.
As regard the appellant's plea for imposition of penalty it will be apt to quote the law propounded by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in WP(C) 3114/2007, decided on 03/12/2007 (Bhagat Singh Vs. CIC & Anrs). Para 17 of the aforesaid decision is extracted below:
"This Court takes a serious note of the two year delay in releasing information, the lack adequate reasoning in the orders of the public information officer and the Appellate Authority and the lack of application of mind in relation to the nature of the information sought. The materials on record clearly show the lackadaisical approach of the second and third respondent in releasing the information sought. However, the petitioner has not been able to demonstrate that they malafidely denied the information sought. Therefore, a direction to the Central Information Commission to initiate action under Section 20 of the Act cannot be issued."Page 2 of 3
In this case, it cannot be said that the CPIO acted consciously and deliberately with intent to deny the information sought by the appellant. Imposition of penalty on the CPIO, therefore, would not be justified.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
BASANT SETH Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy:
(A.K.Jha) Deputy Secretary and Deputy Registrar Page 3 of 3