Central Information Commission
Jatin Mittal vs Wapcos Limited on 20 May, 2025
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
File No: CIC/WPCSL/A/2024/608831
Jatin Mittal .....अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
PIO,
WAPCOS Limited, 76-C,
Institutional Area, Sector - 18,
Gurugram - 122015 .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 15.05.2025
Date of Decision : 19.05.2025
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 12.11.2023
CPIO replied on : 22.12.2023
First appeal filed on : 13.12.2023
First Appellate Authority's order : 10.01.2024
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : NIL
Information sought:
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 12.11.2023 (online) seeking the following information:
"Regarding Memorandum No. WAP/VIG/2/36/2019/336 dated 24.05.2023 & show cause notice No. WAP/VIG/2/36/2019/195 dated 20.03.2023 issued to Jatin Mittal, Deputy Chief Engineer, WAPCOS Limited:Page 1 of 7
Regarding Memorandum No. WAP/VIG/2/36/2019/336 dated 24.05.2023 & show cause notice No. WAP/VIG/2/36/2019/195 dated 20.03.2023 issued to Jatin Mittal, Deputy Chief Engineer, WAPCOS Limited
1. When was the complaint/issue received by Vigilance department against the undersigned?
2. Why the show cause notice was issued without providing any supporting documents to the undersigned?
3. As per 'Reference for Vigilance Officers, Government of India, 2022' & File No. *CIC/CVCOM/A/2017/120855/SD', the undersigned requests to provide a copy of all the File noting of disciplinary proceedings against him. The documents shall include but not limited to the following:
a) The detail of complaint/Issue
b) All memos, show cause notice, Memorandum and action order, if any
c) File noting of disciplinary proceedings from receipt of complaint to till date.
d) Statements of witnesses recorded in the course of preliminary inquiry conducted by the department
e) Provide reference to the specific clause and guidelines which have been violated by the undersigned based on which the inquiry was initiated
4. As per F.No. 104/76/2022-AVD.IA dated 28th September 2022, DoPT, the vigilance clearance shall not be denied due to filing of a complaint unless there is, prima facie, substance to verifiable allegations regarding
(i) Corruption (ii) Possession of assets disproportionate to known sources of income (iii) Moral turpitude (iv) violation of CCS (Conduct) Rules, 1964.
Further, if preliminary inquiry, in this regard, takes more than 3 months to be completed, then Vigilance Clearance shall not be denied. However, in the current matter, the same guidelines were not followed. Kindly provide the reasons for which the Vigilance Department deviated from the guidelines and did not provide the Vigilance Clearance to the undersigned.
5. The details of timelines being followed in the referred case from the date of receipt of complaint by the authority till date. Kindly provide copy of the clause as well.
Page 2 of 76. As per Vigilance Manual, 7.47.2, "Delay in decision-making by authorities in processing vigilance cases would also be construed as misconduct under the relevant Conduct Rules and would be liable to attract penal action. All administrative authorities shall take note and strictly adhere to the prescribed schedule of time limits in dealing with disciplinary cases".
a) What are the reasons for the proceedings being protracted?
b) What actions have been taken against the authorities as the referred case has already been long delayed?
7. What is the current employment status of undersigned in WAPCOS? Whether employed in WAPCOS or discharged from duty in WAPCOS?
8. If employed, then why the salaries from January 2023 to October 2023 has not been provided? If discharged from duty, then why the relevant documents and dues have not been released. Kindly provide the specific clause and guidelines of WAPCOS or relevant department which have been referred in the case.
a) Relieving Letter
b) Experience Certificate
c) Perks of 7 months for 2020 (Jun-Dec)
d) PRP for 3 years (2019-22)
e) Gratuity amount for serving WAPCOS for 9 years 8 months (2013-23)
f) EPF + VPF + Employee Pension Fund
g) Salary for Jan'23, Feb'23 and 27 days of Mar'23
h) EL Encashment
9. Specific Clause and guideline of DoPT or WAPCOS or any other department based on which the HR Division denied the relieving to the undersigned.
10. As per OM 28034/4/94-Estt/(A) date 31st May 1994, in case of resignation, the competent authority to accord vigilance clearance shall ensure the expeditious consideration of the request. What steps were taken by the competent authority to expedite the Vigilance Clearance of the undersigned as the undersigned gave the resignation on 19th Jan 2023?
11. Why the income tax has been deducted and paid for the month of January' 23, February 23 and March 23 from the undersigned salary which has not been paid to the undersigned till date?
Page 3 of 712. When was the attachment uploaded for Recruitment & Promotion Rules and WAPCOS CDA Rules were uploaded on WAPCOS official website?
13. Kindly provide the guidelines/SOP used for submission of claims by the consultants/Experts, verification, approval and payment in WAPCOS."
2. The CPIO furnished a point-wise reply to the Appellant on 22.12.2023 stating as under:
"1. Issue received on 06.12.2022.
2. Queries asked for are explanatory in nature.
3. Show cause notice and Memorandum already provided to the applicant, copy enclosed again. Other information cannot be provided as it attracted sections 8(1)(h) of the Right to Information Act, 2005.
4. Queries asked for are explanatory in nature.
5. Model time limit as per Vigilance Manual clause No. 7.47.2 (updated 2021) is being followed. Information available in open source.
6. Queries asked for are explanatory in nature.
7. Shri Jatin Mittal has tendered resignation vide letter dated 19.01.2023.
However, his resignation has not been accepted.
8. His terminal dues & other documents will be released/issued on acceptance of his resignation and completion of other necessary formalities.
9. Vigilance clearance not received from vigilance section on account of ongoing investigation of case.
10. Queries asked for are explanatory in nature.
11. The Income-Tax deducted and paid for the Month of January-23, February-23 and March-23 on due basis.
12. Updated on website in May, 2023.
Page 4 of 713. Monthly remuneration of Experts is released based on claim from submitted by concerned Expert and verification of work done by concerned afficer, further duly approved by concerned HoD as per office order provisions.
Query no. 2, 4, 6 & 10 are not covered within the definition of information u/s 2(f) of RTI Act, 2005."
3. Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 13.12.2023. The FAA vide its order dated 10.01.2024, upheld the reply of CPIO.
4. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Present in person.
Respondent: Shri Sumir Chawla, Additional Chief Manager (HRD) & CPIO, Shri Purnesh Kumar Roy, Dy. Chief Manager (HR), Shri Saket Kumar, Engineer (Vigilance) and Shri Hitesh, Dy. Manager present in person.
5. Written submissions of the Respondent are taken on record.
6. The Appellant, during the hearing, reiterated the contents of his RTI application and instant appeal and submitted that complete and correct information on point Nos. 7, 8, 9 and 13 of his RTI application has not been provided to him by the Respondent.
7. During the hearing, the Appellant raised his grievance that he is an employee of Respondent Public Authority. A show-cause notice was issued to him in the year 2023 but perks/PRP and salary has been withheld by the Respondent Public Authority from the year January 2020 and January 2023 respectively without quoting any rules/reasons, etc. He stated that his resignation was not accepted and on the other hand, his bio-metric attendance was disabled/blocked from the machine. He is neither been discharged from the service nor has he been able to attend the office.
8. The Respondent while defending their case inter-alia submitted that point-wise reply/information, as per the documents available on their record has been provided to the Appellant.
Page 5 of 79. Upon being queried by the Commission, the Respondent stated that investigation is likely to be completed within a week and final decision will be taken in the matter.
Decision:
10. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both the parties and perusal of the records, observes that the Appellant is aggrieved that complete and correct information on point Nos. 7, 8, 9 and 13 of the RTI application has not been provided to him by the Respondent. On the other hand, the Respondent contended that point-wise reply/information, as per the documents available on their record has been provided to the Appellant. During the hearing, however, the Appellant stated that he is not pressing for reply against point No. 13.
11. The Commission observes that the Appellant has sought specific information in his RTI application related to his own employment status in the Respondent Public Authority and issues appurtenant thereto. Despite the fact, the Respondent has not furnished complete and correct information to the Appellant. The reply given by the Respondent on point Nos. 7 and 8 of the RTI application is vague, misleading and evasive and is outrightly bad in nature. The Commission observes that the Respondent Public Authority seems to be harassing the Appellant in all possible ways i.e. by not giving complete and correct information and by not deciding his vigilance case within time limit. Due to this vigilance case, the Respondent Public Authority has neither accepted the resignation of the Appellant nor paid him his dues/salary, etc. which is even prior to the initiation of vigilance proceedings. Stoppage of salary is not permissible. Even in cases where government employee is placed under suspension, he is paid subsistence allowance and here nothing has been paid to the Appellant. The working of the Respondent Public Authority is not understood/appreciable.
12. In view of the above facts and circumstances, the Respondent is directed to re-examine point Nos. 7 and 8 of the RTI application dated 12.12.2023 and provide correct information with current status as per the records available, free of cost, to the Appellant.
13. The above directions of the Commission should be complied within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of this order.
Page 6 of 714. The FAA is directed to ensure compliance of this order.
15. With respect to other points of the RTI application including point Nos. 9 and 13, the Commission finds no infirmity in the reply and as a sequel to it further clarifications tendered by the PIO during hearing as the same was found to be in consonance with the provisions of RTI Act.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Vinod Kumar Tiwari (िवनोद कुमार ितवारी) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स!ािपत ित) (S. Anantharaman) Dy. Registrar 011- 26181927 Date Copy To:
The FAA, WAPCOS Limited, 76-C, Institutional Area, Sector - 18, Gurugram - 122015 Page 7 of 7 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)