Central Information Commission
Pawan Kumar Singh vs C-Dot on 18 June, 2025
Author: Heeralal Samariya
Bench: Heeralal Samariya
के न्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ मागग, मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई दिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
नितीय अपील संख्या / Second Appeal No. CIC/CADOT/A/2024/619707.
Shri. Pawan Kumar Singh. ... अपीलकताग/Appellant
VERSUS/बनाम
PIO, ...प्रनतवािीगण /Respondent
Centre for Development of Telematics.
Date of Hearing : 16.06.2025
Date of Decision : 16.06.2025
Chief Information Commissioner : Shri Heeralal Samariya
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 09.02.2024
PIO replied on : 04.03.2024
First Appeal filed on : 07.03.2024
First Appellate Order on : NA
2ndAppeal/complaint received on : 13.05.2024
Information soughtand background of the case:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 09.02.2024 seeking information on following points:-
"I am writing under the provisions of the Right to Information Act, 2005, seeking information regarding my salary and related matters during my medical leave period from 19-06-2023 to 13-09-2023, as well as subsequent events.
I would be thankful if the following details are provide to me:
1. Please provide information on why my salary was stopped from August 2023, as I did not receive any communication regarding this matter.
2. Kindly specify the rule or procedure under which my salary was stopped during my medical leave period.
3. 1 resumed duty on September 25th, 2023, and fulfilled all formalities as instructed by the HR department. However, my salary was not disbursed until January 31st, 2024. Please clarify the rule or procedure under which my salary was stopped for the period between my resumption of duty and January 31st, 2024, especially considering this period is not under any inquiry.
4. I did not receive any communication regarding the non-disbursement of my salary even after resuming the duty on 25-09-2023. Please provide an explanation for this lack of communication.
5. Am I eligible for compensation or any interest for the period when my salary was not disbursed, particularly for the period between September 25th, 2023, and January 31st, 2024, which is not under any inquiry?
Page 1 I request that the information be provided to me in writing or via email within the stipulated time frame as per the Right to Information Act, 2005."
The CPIO, vide letter dated 04.03.2024 replied as under:-
"Reply: You have shown interest in seeking information about promotions. You are requested to kindly be specific in seeking information"
Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 07.03.2024. The FAA vide order dated 10.06.2024 stated as under:
" Your case is under inquiry. The decision is subject to outcome of the inquiry report...'' Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
Appellant: Present in person.
Respondent: Mr. Abhishek Praharaj, Advocate and Cdr. Alex Lilly Mary (Retd)/CPIO- participated in the hearing.
The Respondent placed on record order of FAA dated 10.06.2024 during course of proceedings.
The Appellant stated that the relevant information has not been furnished to him till date. He stated that the issue relates to deduction of his salary during his medical leave and same should be furnished by the PIO as per the provisions of the RTI Act.
The Respondent stated that there was inadvertent typographical error in CPIO reply. They further stated that the FAA in order dated 10.06.2024 has clearly mentioned that the information sought by the Appellant is subject matter of internal inquiry and same is exempted from disclosure under section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act.
Decision:
Upon perusal of records and examining the facts of the case at hand, it is noted that the Appellant's queries had been appropriately answered by the custodian of information. The order of FAA is self- explanatory and information as permissible under the provisions of the RTI Act has been duly supplied to the Appellant. In the given circumstances, no further intervention of the Commission is warranted in this case under the RTI Act.
Page 2 Appeal is disposed off accordingly.
Heeralal Samariya (हीरालाल सामररया) Chief Information Commissioner (मुख्य सूचना आयुक्त) Authenticated true copy (अनिप्रमानणत सत्यानपत प्रनत) S. K. Chitkara (एस. के . नचटकारा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26186535 Page 3 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)