Central Information Commission
C. Shanmugam vs Department Of Posts on 19 May, 2022
Author: Saroj Punhani
Bench: Saroj Punhani
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबागंगनाथमाग , मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
Files No. : CIC/POSTS/A/2021/119200+
CIC/POSTS/A/2021/119988+
CIC/POSTS/A/2021/138362+
C Shanmugam ......अपीलकता /Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
1. CPIO,
Department of Posts, Supdt. of
Post Office, Chengalpattu Division,
RTI Cell, Chengalpattu, Kanchipuram - 603001,
Tamil Nadu.
2. CPIO,
Department of Posts, O/o the Chief
Postmaster, RTI Cell, Anna Road,
HPO, Chennai - 600002, Tamil Nadu.
3. CPIO,
Department of Posts, O/o the Sr. Supdt. of
Post Office, Chennai City Central Division,
RTI Cell,
Chennai - 600017, Tamil Nadu. .... ितवादीगण /Respondents
Date of Hearing : 06/05/2022
Date of Decision : 17/05/2022
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Saroj Punhani
Note: The above referred Appeals have been clubbed for decision as these are
based on the similar RTI Applications.
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
1
File No. RTI CPIO First Appeal FAA's order Second
Application replied on dated dated Appeal dated
dated
119200 13.11.2020 07.12.2020 04.01.2021 04.02.2021 30.04.2021
119988 17.11.2020 03.12.2020 04.01.2021 05.02.2021 05.05.2021
&
15.02.2021
138362 23.03.2021 15.04.2021 17.04.2021 12.05.2021 24.08.2021
&
24.05.2021
CIC/POSTS/A/2021/119200
Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 13.11.2020 seeking the following information:
1. "The nature of action taken on my letter cited (23-10-2020) and certified copy of Note file created on my letter cited.
2. The name and designation of employees who were appointed on temporary basis and terminated in Chengalpattu Division during the period from 2017 upto October 2020 in the enclosed Annexure-A or any other format
3. The certified copies of Duties, responsibilities, power of postman, BPM. SPM, Inspector of Post Offices and Supdt of P. Chengalpattu Division
4. The temporary employees are not issued any appointment /ousting orders or service certificates. Please furnish the certified copy of circular/ order for restrict to i. Issue of appointment ii. Transfer iii. Leave posting iv. Termination / ousting orders v. Issue monthly pay slips for working regular and temporary employees vi. Issue of service certificate to the working / worked temporary employees
5. The total number of New Branches was opened in Chengalpattu Division and staff positions and its achievements in the enclosed Annexure-B & C or any other formats during the year from January 2017 to October 2020.2
6. The number of days for delivery period for Ordinary letters, Regd. letters and M 0 and speed post for Local delivery of same Pin code of booking Post Office. ( 603 202 )."
The CPIO/Respondent no. 1 herein furnished a point wise detailed reply to the appellant on 07.12.2020.
Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 04.01.2021. FAA's order dated 04.02.2021 upheld the reply of CPIO against points No. 1, 2, 3, 4 & 5 of the RTI application and with regard to point No. 6 , the FAA directed the CPIO as follows:-
"..................CPIO is directed to furnish the information sought by the appellant in his RTI application within 5 days on receipt of this order."
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, the appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal on the ground of non-receipt of complete desired information except for point no. 6 of RTI Application.
CIC/POSTS/A/2021/119988 Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 11.01.2019 seeking the following information;
1. The nature of action taken on my letter cited 123-10-2020) and certified copy of Note file create on letter cited.
2. The name and designation of Employees who were appointed on temporary basis and terminated in 7 Nag. Division during the period from 2017 to up. to October 2020 in the enclosed Annexure-a or any format.
3. a) The certified copy of Post Office Guide Poo, 2 Sec 2. h) The dated of approval, publication in the Department website and name of NEWS papers in Tamil Nadu about the guidelines method of addressing in Sec II-(a) (1) to 8 of Post Office Guide Part II.
4. The names of officer and date of joining who are in charge for sorting to delivery section for registered letters pertain to area of pincode 600 002 1Anna Sala. 700-01600 Office), 600 034 (Cathedral Garden Road, 3 Nungambakk.n MDO(Beat Number 7) during the pelted from 01/10/2020 to 13/11/2020.
5. The certified copies of duties, responsibilities. powers of Postman, BPM, SPM, Inspector of Post Offices and Suptt of Post Offices T Nagar Division.
6. The certified copy of list/covers addressed to TNEB Anna Salai Chennai 600
002 and Universal Scimpo General Insurance Co Cathedral Garden Road, 600 034 were returned to senders due to insufficient address during the period from 1/10/2020 to 13/11/2020.
7. If no appointment / termination orders were issued to anybody during the period from January 2017 to October 2020, the certified copy of circular/ order for restricting to
1. Issue of appointment
2.Transfer
3.Lenve posting
4. Termination/ ousting orders and to
5.Issue of monthly pay alms for working regular and temporary employees and
6. Issue of Service Certificated to the working/ worked t temporary employees.
8. The total number of New Branches opened in T Nagar Division and staff positions and its achievements are to be furnished in the enclosed Annexure B&C or any other formats during the year from January 2017 to October 2020.
The CPIO/ Respondent no. 2 furnished a reply to the appellant on 03.12.2020 against point No. 6 of the RTI application, which is as follows:-
"As per the decision of the Hon'ble CIC in its appellate order in Rile No. CIC /SB/A/2015 /000168 dated 24.10.2016, the collating and compiling information would disproportionately divert the resources of the Despondent organization. Hence, the disclosure of the information sought is exempted from disclosure under Section 7(9) of the RTI Act. Also as per G.I. Dept of Per & Trg. OM No.1/18/2011- 112 dated 16.09.2011, the Act does not cast an obligation upon the Public authority, to collect or collate such non-available information and then furnish it to an applicant. Hence the information sought for could not be furnished as the same is not readily available in material form an defined in Section 2(f) of RT1 Act 2005.
The Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP(C) NO. 6454/2011 CBSE & Ant. VS, Aditya Bandopadhyay & Ors) had observed that Only where the information sought is not 4 a part of the record of a public authority, and where such information is not required to be maintained under any law or the rules or regulations of the public authority, the Act does not case an obligation upon the public authority, to collect or collate such non-available information and then furnish it to an applicant."
Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 04.01.2021. FAA's order dated 04.02.2021 upheld the reply of CPIO against points No. 2, 3 (a), (b), 5, 6, & 8 of the RTI application and with regard to other points, the CPIO is directed as follows:-
Point No. 1:- the CPIO has been directed to get the disposal of the said complaint from the SSPOs, Chennai City South Division and give suitable reply to the appellant within 7 days on receipt of this order. Point No. 4:- ................CPIO directed to give suitable reply for the pincode pertains to 600034 and also directed to forward the copy of the application to the Chief Postmaster, anna Road HPO, Chennai -600002 for supply of information for the pincode pertaining to 600002, within 7 days on receipt of this order.
Point No. 7 & 9:- ............CPIO is directed to give suitable reply to the appellant within 7 days on receipt of this order.
In compliance with the FAA's order, CPIO furnished a revised reply to the appellant on 15.02.2021 against points No. 1, 4, 7 & 9 of the RTI application.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal .
CIC/POSTS/A/2021/138362 Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 23.03.2021 seeking the following information:
1. Nowadays no Postal acknowledgment cards are not delivered I received on par with other postal areas even though the Postal Department is collecting an extra amount of Rs.3/-per letter. The nature of action is taken to watch / streamline the delivery of acknowledgement cards to the senders.5
2. In the POD taken from the postal tracking web site, there are no names of sender/receiver. The nature of taken to incorporate the names of sender and receiver in POD.
3. Certified copy of RTI Register maintained in your Office for the period from 01-11-2020 to 31-12-2020.
4. Certified copy of Dispatch Register maintained in your Office as on 24-11- 20, 25-11-20, 16-12-20 to 20-12-20.
5. Certified copy of Fair copy /computer typing Register maintained in your Office as on 24-11-20, 16-12-20 and & 15-02-21 with name of Typist/Computer Operator on the above dates.
6. Certified copy of postal receipts No. and date for which RTI reply sent to me along with a copy of POD .
7. Certified copy of Circular / order of Postal Department for issuing appointment / termination order to the newly recruited temporary/permanent employees during the period from January 2017 to October 2020.
The CPIO/Respondent no. 3 furnished a point wise detailed reply to the appellant on 15.04.2021.
Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 17.04.2021. FAA's order dated 12.05.2021 upheld the reply of CPIO against points No.1, 3, 6 & 7 of the RTI application and with regard to other points, the CPIO is directed as follows:-
Point No. 2& 5 :- the CPIO has been directed to give suitable reply to the appellant within 15 days on receipt of this order.
In compliance with the FAA's order, CPIO furnished a reply to the appellant on 24.05.2021 against points No. 2 & 5 of the RTI application.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal on the ground of non-receipt of complete desired information except at points no. 3 & 4 of RTI Application.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Not present.6
Respondent no. 1: S. Sivaprahasam, SPO & CPIO present through videoconference.
Respondent no. 2: Murli, Chief Postmaster & CPIO present through videoconference.
Respondent no. 3: T. V. Sundari, SSPO & CPIO present through videoconference.
The Respondent no. 1 submitted that a point wise reply along with relevant information has already been provided to the Appellant. Further, upon receipt of hearing notice, a compiled reply along with additional information has also been furnished to the Appellant vide written submission dated 04.05.2022 through email and also a copy of the same has been uploaded on the CIC's website for kind perusal of the bench.
The Respondent no. 2 submitted that a point wise reply along with relevant information has already been provided to the Appellant. Further, upon receipt of the hearing notice, a compiled form of reply along with additional information has also been furnished to the Appellant vide written submission dated 02.05.2022 through email and also a copy of the same has been uploaded on the CIC's website for kind perusal of the bench.
The Respondent no. 3 submitted that a timely point wise reply along with relevant inputs has already been provided to the Appellant. Further, upon receipt of hearing notice, a compiled form of reply along with additional information has also been furnished to the Appellant vide written submission dated 02.05.2022 through email and also a copy of the same has been uploaded on the CIC's website for kind perusal of the bench. No additional information is left at their end.
Decision:
The Commission upon a perusal of records finds no infirmity in the replies provided by the CPIOs' as the same adequately suffices the enormous information sought by the Appellant in a desired format as per the provisions of RTI Act.
Further, the issue raised by the Appellant challenging the veracity of the information is purely a matter of grievance which is outside the scope and ambit of RTI Act. In this regard, the Appellant is advised to pursue his matter through appropriate administrative mechanism.7
In view of the above, no further intervention of the Commission is warranted in the matters and submissions of the CPIOs' are upheld.
The appeal(s) are disposed of accordingly.
Saroj Punhani (सरोजपुनहािन) हािन) Information Commissioner (सूचनाआयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स#यािपत ित) (C.A. Joseph) Dy. Registrar 011-26179548/ [email protected] सी. ए. जोसेफ, उप-पंजीयक दनांक / 8