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 2, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Gaurav M. Panchal vs Department Of Posts on 7 December, 2023

                                       के   ीय सूचना आयोग
                                Central Information Commission
                                   बाबा गंगनाथ माग,मुिनरका
                                 Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                                 नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं या / Second Appeal No. CIC/POSTS/A/2022/660168

Gaurav M. Panchal                                                ... अपीलकता/Appellant

                                              VERSUS
                                               बनाम
CPIO:
Department Of Posts,
Bardoli Division                                               ... ितवादीगण/Respondents

Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:

 RTI : 10.08.2022                  FA      : 15.09.2022         SA       : 13.11.2022

 CPIO : 02.09.2022                 FAO : 01.11.2022             Hearing : 05.12.2023


Date of Decision: 06.12.2023
                                          CORAM:
                                    Hon'ble Commissioner
                                 SMT. ANANDI RAMALINGAM
                                         ORDER

1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 10.08.2022 seeking information on the following points:

 Subject matter: Order dated 31.12.2018 of SPO's Bardoli Division regarding the appellant's Child Care Leave (CCL) application. In light of the above, the following information had been sought:
(i) Copy of order in which it is mentioned that "Divorce Certificate" is must and "Divorce Deed" is not valid.
(ii) Status of his Application Dated 03.01.2019- Regarding CCL Page 1 of 4
(iii) Status of his Application Dated 20.03.2019- Regarding CCL Sent through (RG919220864IN)
(iv) Status of his Application Dated 07.05.2019 - Regarding CCL Sent through (RG919218741IN)
(v) Reasons of Delayed to deciding the Case (CCL) - Action taken on his application dated 24.12.2018"

2. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 02.09.2022 and the same is reproduced as under:-

(i) "Particular order in this regard is not available with this office
(ii) to iv. The required information does not fall under the section 2(f) of RTI Act, 2005.

Hence the same cannot be provided.

(v) The CPIO is required to be provided only such information under section 2(f) of RTI act 2005 that already exists in material form and held by the public authority. Under the provision of RTI Act, reason cannot be provided as per CIC decision vide order No. CIC/BS/A/2012/000767+000768+000919/160 Dt. Jan 2013."

3. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 15.09.2022 alleging that the information provided was incomplete, false and misleading. The FAA vide order dated 01.11.2022 directed the CPIO to furnish the information to the Appellant.

4. The appellant and on behalf of the respondent Shri Arvind Kumar, Superintendent of Posts and CPIO, Bardoli Division, attended the hearing through video/audio conference.

5. The appellant inter alia submitted that no action had been taken on his applications dated 24.12.2018, 03.01.2019, 20.03.2019, 07.05.2019 despite a period of almost five years having elapsed. He further argued that the CPIO had not complied with the directions passed by the FAA vide order dated 01.11.2022.

6. The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that the erstwhile CPIO had replied to the appellant vide letter dated 02.12.2022. They further contended Page 2 of 4 that the appellant was removed from services vide SPO's Bardoli memo no. B1/Disc/Rule- 14/10/GMP/2020 dated 12.10.2022. Henceforth, he had filed a total number of 16 RTI applications till the date of hearing with mala fide in order to harass the Public Authority. The respondent referred to their point-wise reply dated 02.12.2022 and the same is produced as under:

(i) "No specific order with respect to the information sought is available in our Office.
(ii) Shri Gaurav Panchal had applied for CCL of 153 days vide application dated 24.12.2018 and he was requested to submit his Divorce deed vide letter dated 31.12.2018 as proof of the fact that he and his wife were separated. Thereafter, the appellant had submitted copy of his Divorce Deed and had again sought the action taken on his application. Their office had sought legal opinion from the District Government Pleader, District Court, Surat, vide letter dated 05.01.2019 as to whether Divorce deed was proof or not. However, they had not received any response from the Government Advocate, hence, there was status quo on the application dated 03.01.2019.

(iii) Despite sending reminders to the District Government Pleader, no legal opinion has been received. Therefore, no action could be taken on the appellant's application dated 20.03.2019.

(iv) Despite sending reminders to the District Government Pleader, no legal opinion has been received. Therefore, no action could be taken on the appellant's application dated 07.05.2019

(v) They had sent reminders to the District Government Pleader seeking legal opinion and due to non-receipt of any response, there was delay in disposal of the appellant's application dated 24.12.2018."

The CPIO further assured that he would expedite the file and take up the matter with the Government Pleader and, in case, there was no progress at the end of Government Pleader, he would ensure that the matter is referred to the Collectorate Office.

7. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both parties and perusal of records, observes that the respondent gave a detailed report Page 3 of 4 dated 02.12.2022 regarding the action taken by the erstwhile CPIOs in pursuance to the orders of the FAA. The CPIO during the course of hearing assured that they would take additional steps to expedite the file of the appellant seeking clarification and legal opinion from the Government Pleader to enable the disposal of his pending applications. In light of the submissions made by the respondent, the CPIO is directed to provide a comprehensive reply to the appellant bringing out the latest position and tentative timeline for disposal of appellant's applications referred to in the RTI application, within three weeks from the date of receipt of this order. A copy of the said reply may also be marked to the Commission. With these observations and directions, the appeal is disposed of.

Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.

Sd/-


                                                                      आनंदी राम लंगम)
                                                 (Anandi Ramalingam) (आनं           म
                                                                          सूचना आयु )
                                                Information Commissioner (सू
                                                                दनांक/Date: 06.12.2023
Authenticated true copy

Suman Bala (सुमन बाला)
Dy. Registrar (उप पंजीयक)
011-26180514 (०११-२६१८०५१८)

Addresses of the parties:

1. The CPIO
O/O. The Superintendent of Post Offices,
Nodal CPIO, RTI Cell,
Department Of Posts,
Bardoli Division, Bardoli-394601


2. Gaurav M. Panchal




                                                                                    Page 4 of 4