Central Information Commission
Mr.Vasudev Sharma vs Mcd, Gnct Delhi on 11 October, 2011
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2011/002378/15127
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2011/002378
Relevant facts emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Vasudev Sharma,
Village & Post-Rasool Pur Rithori,
Distt. Bulandshehar (U.P.),
Pin-203202.
.
Respondent : Public Information Officer
Municipal Corporation of Delhi Horticulture Department (HQ) 16th Floor, Dr. SPM Civic Center, JLN Marg, Minto Road, New Delhi RTI application filed on : 03/01/2011 PIO reply 1 28/02/2011 PIO reply 2 : 04/03/2011 First Appeal filed on : 09/05/2011 First Appellate Authority order of : Not mentioned.
Second Appeal received on : 27/07/2011 Information Sought:
1. Give information about how many gardeners are working in the Horticulture Department, MCD?
2. When the vacant posts of the gardeners will fulfill?
3. Give information according to zone wise of the gardeners working with MCD as their educational qualification is High School (agriculture).
4. On which post did the employees whose qualifications are B.Sc. (agriculture), get the promotions.
5. What are the rules (R.R.) related to the promotions of the employees.
6. On which post did a gardener can be promoted and when the posts of the blank gardeners posts will fulfilled.
7. What the reasons are for not provided any promotions to the gardeners?
8. The gardeners must be get a pay scale on according to the A.C.P. but they are receiving the pay scale of Rs (2610-4000), which is not justified. They have to receive the pay scale of Chaudhary- (3050-4590) but they are not receiving that. Who is/are the responsible for this inconvenience to such gardeners?
9. If the gardeners are getting a wrong pay scale, then when did they get the right pay scale?
The PIO Reply 1:
1. There are a total of 1180 posts gardeners are required in the Horticulture Department, Rohini Zone, out of which 857 are employed.
2. The process of fulfillment of the vacant posts is done by the Head Office, Horticulture, Rohini Zone.
3. The lists of the educational qualifications of the employees are enclosed here with.
4. There are ........ no. of employees whose educational Qualification is B.Sc. (agriculture). The process of promotion is done by the Head Office, Horticulture, Rohini Zone.
5. This information is related to the Head Office, Horticulture.
6. As stated above.
7. As stated above.
8. Related to Accounts Branch, Rohini Zone.
9. As stated above.
The PIO Reply 2:
1. There are a total of 990 posts gardeners are required in the Horticulture Department, Rohini Zone, out of which 815 are employed.
2. Related to the Head Office.
3. The educational qualification of the gardeners with agriculture is not essential.
4. The education qualification of gardener is B Sc. Agriculture in Horticulture department, MCD, West Zone. The promotion was done in the post of chaudhary for them. The rest of the question is related to the Head Office.
5. The promotion can be done on the basis of the R.R. to the High School Pass Out The provisions of the promotions is a policy matter which is related to the Head Office.
6. Related to the Head Office.
7. Related to the Head Office.
8. All gets a benefit of ACP Scheme, for 12, 24 years, if any employee is left then he can informed to the Office.
9. The pay scale is settled on the basis of the rules of the Accounts Department.
Grounds for the First Appeal:
Unsatisfactory reply was given by the PIO.
Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
No such order was mentioned by the Appellant.
Ground of the Second Appeal:
Unsatisfactory information had been given by the PIO.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
Both the parties were given an opportunity for hearing. However, neither party appeared. From a perusal of the papers it appears that the information from various zones has been provided to the Appellant. Some information had also been provided by the PIO, Head Office. The Appellant had also not mentioned any specific reasons for his dissatisfaction with the information provided to him.
Decision:
The Appeal is disposed.
The information available on the records appears to have been provided.
This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties. Any information in compliance with this Order will be provided free of cost as per Section 7(6) of RTI Act.
Shailesh Gandhi Information Commissioner 11 October 2011 (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number. (BK))