Central Information Commission
Mrm Yogeshwar Raj vs Air India on 23 June, 2016
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Room No. 06, Club Building, Old JNU Campus
New Delhi 110067. Tel: 011 - 26182597, 26182598
Appeal No.: CIC/VS/A/2015/002971/BJ
Appellant : Shri Yogeshwar Raj
Villa No. 35, Vaibhav Green Homes, Opp. Nalla
Narsimha Reddy Engineering College, Choudarguda
Ghatkesar Mandal, Hyderabad 500088
Respondent(s) : CPIO and Gen. Manager (Engg.)
Air India Engineering Complex,
Begumpet,
Hyderabad 5000156
Date of Hearing : 23/06/2016
Date of Decision : 23/06/2016
Date of filing of RTI application 07.05.2015
CPIO's response 09.05.2015 (Transfer) and 03.06.2015
Date of filing the First appeal 17.06.2015
First Appellate Authority's response Not on Record
Date of filing second appeal before the Commission 03.11.2015
O R D E R
FACTS:
The appellant vide his application dated 07.05.2015 sought attested/ certified copy of the entire "The Model Standing Orders (Central) under the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946".
The CPIO/ General Manager (Engg.) transferred the matter to APIO and AGM (P), RTI Cell (WR). It was stated that the information sought by the appellant was already available online as Page 1 of 3 well as various book shops and not a document of Air India Ltd. The CPIO also submitted that this response was also furnished in reply to point no. (vii) on a previous RTI application dated 18.04.2014. The appellant approached the FAA against the order of CPIO on 17.06.2015. The response of FAA is not on record.
HEARING:
Facts emerging during the hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant: Mr. M. Yogeshwar Raj through TC Mobile No. 09492049058); Respondent: Mr. D. Rajendran, Dy. Manager (Administration O/o the GM(Eng.) (M:9441720916) through VC; and Mr. P. M. Desai, Manager Office Administration (M:8422907825) through VC;
The respondent from Hyderabad Office stated that since the information pertained to erstwhile Air India and that the records were maintained at Mumbai Office, the RTI application was transferred to CPIO, Mumbai on 09/05/2015. It was also emailed to RTI Cell on the same day.
It was noted that the Commission had received an email from the appellant seeking to withdraw the aforesaid appeal. As matter of abundant caution, it was reconfirmed telephonically that the said email had been sent by the appellant. The respondent also confirmed receipt of this email and stated that the appellant had visited the office of the CPIO on 03/11/2015 and given a letter to this effect. It was argued that no further action is required in the matter.
DECISION Considering the fact that the appellant does not wish to pursue the matter and had withdrawn the appeal, no further action is warranted in the matter.
The matter stands closed.
(Bimal Julka) Information Commissioner Authenticated True Copy:
(K.L.Das) Deputy Registrar Page 2 of 3 Page 3 of 3