Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

Maya Devi vs Hindi Academy Delhi on 8 February, 2023

Author: Uday Mahurkar

Bench: Uday Mahurkar

                                       के न्द्रीयसच
                                                  ू नाआयोग
                             Central Information Commission
                                     बाबागंगनाथमागग,मुननरका
                             Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                               नईनिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067

द्वितीयअपीलसंख्या / Second Appeal No.:- CIC/HIACD/A/2022/128482-UM

Mrs. Maya Devi

                                                                              ....अपीलकताा/Appellant
                                            VERSUS
                                              बनाम
CPIO
HINDI ACADEMY DELHI, GNCTD,
SAMUDAAY BHAWAN, PADAM NAGAR,
KISHAN GANJ, DELHI - 110007



                                                                    प्रद्वतवादीगण /Respondent

Date of Hearing      :              02.02.2023
Date of Decision     :              07.02.2023



Date of RTI application                                                     24.09.2021
CPIO's response                                                             29.11.2021
Date of the First Appeal                                                    21.12.2021
First Appellate Authority's response                                        23.05.2022
Date of diarized receipt of Appeal by the Commission                        15.06.2022

                                           ORDER

FACTS The Appellant vide RTI application sought information, as under:-

The CPIO vide letter dated 29.11.2021, furnished a reply to the Appellant, as under:-

Dissatisfied with the reply of the CPIO, the Appellant approached the FAA.The FAA vide order dated 23.05.2022, upheld the reply of the CPIO.

Thereafter, the Appellant filed a Second Appeal before the Commission.

HEARING:

Facts emerging during the hearing:

The following were present:

Appellant: Present in Person (Narender Singh, Son) Respondent: Mr Prakash Lakhchaora Superintendent , Present in Person The Appellant while reiterating the contents of the RTI Application submitted that information has been wrongly denied to them, using Section 81)(j) of the RTI Act 2005. He said that he had sought the information as his father Late Sh. Nathi Singh was an employee of Hindi Academy Delhi, who died in year 2018. He informed that after the death of his father their family were facing hard time to manage their livelihood, due to which they requested the department for the grant of Compassionate appointment to the son of Late Sh. Nathi Singh i.e Mr Narender Singh. But the department did not pay heed to their requests, rather they had provided jobs to many others. He said he had no other option in the circumstances to get justice other than filing an RTI Application. The Respondent in reply agreed to furnish the information to the Appellant.

DECISION:

Keeping in view the facts of the case and the submissions made by both the parties, the Commission observes that law of natural justice demands that the ward of the deceased employee should be employed in the Department and directs the CPIO to furnish correct , point-wise and complete information to the Appellant, strictly in accordance with the spirit of transparency and Page 2 of 3 accountability as enshrined in the RTI Act, 2005 within a period of 30 days from the receipt of this order under the intimation to the Commission.

The Commission further advises Secretary Hindi Academy, Delhi, GNCTD, to consider the case of the Appellant in the backdrop of the above facts and take corrective action, thus adhering to the law of natural justice.

The Appeal stands disposed accordingly.

(Uday Mahurkar) (उदय माहूरकर) ू ना आयुक्त) (Information Commissioner) (सच Authenticated true copy (अद्विप्रमाद्वणत एवं सत्याद्वपत प्रद्वत) (R. K. Rao) (आर.के . राव) (Dy. Registrar) (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26182598 द्वदनांक / Date: 07.02.2023 Page 3 of 3