Central Information Commission
Mr.P N Nigam vs Ministry Of Communications And ... on 20 September, 2012
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26101592
File No. CIC/LS/A/2011/000174/BS/0845
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Mr. P. N. Nigam
Type IV/05, Gr. Floor,
Door Sanchar Colony,
Lakhanpur, Kanpur. U.P.
Respondent : CPIO & DGM(Admin.)
BSNL O/o General Manager Telecom District Kanpur, Kanpur- 208001, U.P. RTI application filed on : 10/03/2010 PIO replied : 08/04/2010 First appeal filed on : 07/05/2010 First Appellate Authority order : Not mentioned.
Second Appeal received on : 22/06/2010 Information Sought:
The appellant has sought various information in 11 points about approval of CGMT UP(E) circle, Lucknow for Indoor treatment of Heart Surgery of Shri R. K. Sawhney, CAO(CA) Kanpur, whether any employee can taken indoor treatment in Hospital/Nursing home etc. other than SSA Kanpur without approval of the CMD, BSNL, New Delhi/CGMT (East) UP Circle Lucknow. He had also sought CVC inquiry reports with respect to letters written to the Department etc. Reply of the CPIO:
CPIO has provided point wise reply to all the 11 queries alongwith some relevant documents and had also asked the appellant to deposit additional fee for information at the rate of Rs.2/-.
Grounds for the First Appeal:
The PIO has not provided complete information. The information sought is different from what has been sought.
Order of the FAA:
Not mentioned.
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
Information provided is unsatisfactory and no response from the FAA.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present Appellant: Mr. P N Nigam through videoconferencing (M 9450932529) Respondent: Mr. P C Dubey, representative of CPIO through videoconferencing (M: 9415400457) Page 1 of 3 The appellant stated that in point no.1 he had asked for a copy of the approval given by the competent authority for indoor treatment of Shri R K Sawhney, however, the CPIO had provided a copy of the medical reimbursement note. He further stated that proper information in respect of query 4, 5, 7 & 9 has not been furnished. The CPIO's representative stated that information as per record has been provided and much of the information sought in the above queries are of the interrogatory nature which is not "information" as defined under section 2(f) of the RTI Act. The appellant requested that inspection of the relevant records may be permitted to which the CPIO's representative agreed.
Decision Notice:
The Commission directs the CPIO to permit the appellant to inspect the relevant records related to his RTI application after fixing a mutually convenient time and date with him within 15 days of receipt of this order. The appellant may also be permitted to take photocopies/extracts free of cost up to 25 pages.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
BASANT SETH Information Commissioner September 20th, 2012 (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (RS) Page 2 of 3 Page 3 of 3