Central Information Commission
Jayant Kumar Singh vs Department Of Defence on 19 December, 2024
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
File No: CIC/DODEF/A/2022/142796 CIC/MODEF/C/2022/664379
CIC/MODEF/C/2022/664380 CIC/MODEF/C/2022/664381
CIC/MODEF/C/2022/664384 CIC/ASINR/C/2022/664335/MODEF
CIC/MODEF/C/2022/664348 CIC/MODEF/C/2022/664353
CIC/MODEF/C/2022/664355 CIC/MODEF/C/2022/664358
CIC/MODEF/C/2022/664363 CIC/MODEF/C/2022/664367
CIC/MODEF/C/2022/664368 CIC/MODEF/C/2022/664371
CIC/MODEF/C/2023/602976 CIC/MODEF/C/2023/602978
CIC/MODEF/C/2023/637530 CIC/MODEF/A/2023/642061
Jayant Kumar Singh ....िशकायतकता /Complainant
.....अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
PIO,
Sainik School, MendraKalan,
Dist - Surguja, Chhattisgarh - 497001 .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 13.12.2024
Date of Decision : 18.12.2024
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari
The above-mentioned second appeals/complaints are clubbed together as
the Appellant/Complainant is common and subject-matter is similar in
nature and hence are being disposed of through a common order.
Page 1 of 50
1. CIC/DODEF/A/2022/142796
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 18.04.2022
CPIO replied on : 21.05.2022
First appeal filed on : 02.06.2022
First Appellate Authority's order : Not on record
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 29.08.2022
Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 18.04.2022 (offline) seeking the following information:
"1. Please refer my RTI Request of 29th Oct 2021 addressed to CPIO & Principal Sainik School Ambikapur submitted online bearing Registration No. MODEF/R/E/21/03370. Specific reasons for not replying this request till date be also submitted on affidavit with supporting evidences corroborating your call.
2. Attested (R) Attested photocopy of the following documents in respect of all the qualifying firms for supply and erection of MS Modular Porta Cabin for staff residences in Aug 2015 at new location of School at Mendra Kalan be provided at the earliest.
(a) Colored Photographs affixed on application for all the vendors shall be self- attested.
(b) Affidavit for constitution of firm.
(c) List of works executed during last five years including copies of Work Orders/Work allotment letters, Copies of completion certificates and Form 16 A/TDS certificate for GST (GSTR-7A).
(d) Annual turnover certificate duly supported with audited balance sheet. The turn over certificate must bear the UDIN. The turn over certificate and audited balance sheet should be from same Chartered Accountant In case balance sheets are not audited, Form 26 AS and/or Annual GST return shall be forwarded in support of turn over.
(e) Audited balance sheet of last five years in case of Limited companies.Page 2 of 50
(f) Solvency certificate from scheduled bank.
(g) Working Capital certificate from scheduled bank.
(h) Affidavit from contractor that there is no Government dues/recovery outstanding against him.
(j) Affidavit from contractor giving brief details of arbitration / litigation cases he was involved in. Contract Awarding Authority will critically examine such details and if contractor is considered habitual litigant, the contract should not be awarded. Contractor shall be deemed to be a habitual litigant if he moves the court more than once ignoring arbitration clause and court does not uphold his view.
(k) 02 self-attested photographs of Proprietor/Partners/ Directors of firm for verification of character and antecedents from the police authorities.
Places where online police verification process is available, the contractor will carry out police verification of the Proprietor/Partners/Directors and submit the verification reports for cross verification by the Department. Alternatively the contractor may submit a copy of valid passport issued by Gol.
(l) Copy of partnership deed in case of partnership firm.
(m) Memorandum & Articles of Association in case of Ltd Companies.
(n) Copy of Registration Companies/Register of Firms. Certificate of firm with Registrar of
(p) Copy of power of attorney/Resolution of the Board in favour of any Partner/Director of the firm.
(q) Copy of immediate last Income Tax Return.
(r) A separate sheet containing specimen signatures (signed in black ink) and affixed with photographs of Proprietor/Partners/Directors.
(s) Self-attested copy of PAN Card of Proprietor, Partners, Directors and the firm/Company.
(t) Self-attested copies of GST registration, EPFO registration and ESIC registration certificates.
Page 3 of 50(u) Payment Vouchers of advance and final payment to contractor.
(v) Performance Guarantee/Standard Security Deposit obtained from Contractor along with release/payment of PG/SSD on being satisfied with construction/due date.
(W) Guarantee/Warranty clause furnished.
2. The flow of information should not be incorrectly withheld by taking refuge under the exemption clause contained in Section 8 (1) (d) (e), (g),
(h), (j) & 11 of the Act. The CPIO has to act consciously & avoid obstructing with a mala fide intention. Any information which could be produced in the court of law as evidence under Sec 74 of Indian Evidence Act 1872 cannot be withheld under the Sec 8 (1) (d), (e), (g (h) & (j) and
11. Being the custodian of the information, it is mandatory on your part to decide judicious supply.
3. Please inform the name, designation and office address of the officers, whose assistance was sought by CPIO in connection with taking decision and supplying information desired under section-5(4) read with 5(5) of Act & also furnish an affidavit declaring the veracity & authenticity of the information supplied to Hon'ble High Court and me. Evasion of reply within the stipulated period attracts the provision of Sec 120B, 166A, 167, 188, 420 and other provisions of IPC 1860 as applicable in this case on merits."
The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 21.05.2022 stating as under:
"Refer to your 03 (three) RTI Applications dated 18 April 2022 seeking information on the running of the Cadets' Mess, fabrication of Porta Cabins and release of vacancies. Your RTI applications refer to trailing online RTI Applications bearing the following registration numbers.
(a) MODEF/R/E/21/03144 dated 06 Oct 2021
(b) MODEF/R/E/21/03303 dated 25 Oct 2021
(c) MODEF/R/E/21/03370 dated 29 Oct 2021 With reference to the above, it is stated that this office has not received RTI Applications mentioned in para 1 (b) & (c). The school received RTI Application mentioned at para 1 (a) and it was disposed off in Page 4 of 50 accordance with the provisions of RTI Act vide this school letter no.
SSAP/Est/RTI/1049-V/ 0983 dated 12 Nov 2021 (copy enclosed)."
Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 02.06.2022. The FAA order is not on record.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
2. CIC/MODEF/C/2022/664379 Relevant facts emerging from complaint:
RTI application filed on : NIL CPIO replied on : 17.07.2020 First appeal filed on : Not on record
First Appellate Authority's order : Not on record 2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 01.12.2022 Information sought:
The Complainant filed an RTI application dated NIL (online) seeking the following information:
"It is humbly requested to provide the following information on advance disbursal and settlement of advances paid out to staff by providing attested xerox copies of corresponding rules and regulations.
(a) Staff authorised to seek advances.
(b) Occasions for seeking advances by Defence Officers, Regular and Contractual Staff.
(c) Duration for settlement of advances sought by the staff.
(d) Pecuniary or administrative action provision for non-settlement of advances within the stipulated time period laid down in provisions.
(e) Session wise list of advances disbursed to staff till date from the date of inception.
(f) List of staff irregular in settlement of advances and action taken against them.Page 5 of 50
(g) List of staff paying fine for non-settlement of advances within the authorised period.
(h) List of defaulter staff of non-settlement of advances with administrative action taken against them till date.
(i) Clearance taken from LAO (Army) Jabalpur on non-settlement of advances within the stipulated time frame from 2008 to till this date."
The CPIO furnished a reply to the complainant on 17.07.2020 stating as under:
"Please refer to your multiple MODEF/R/E/20/01117 dated 23 Mar MODEF/R/E/20/01172 dated 01 Apr online RTI applications bearing Registration No. 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01171 dated 01 Apr 2020, 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01178 dated 01 Apr 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01186 dated
03 Apr 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01188 dated 03 Apr 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01515 dated 15 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01553 dated 19 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01556 dated 19 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01661 dated 29 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01633 dated 27 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01251 dated 13 Apr 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01709 dated 03 Jun 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01687 dated 01 Jun 2020 and MODEF/R/E/20/01250 dated 12 Apr 2020, received by this school from Sainik Schools Society, Ministry of Defence, New Delhi by email on 25, 26 Jun 2020 and 01 Jul 2020.
There are a total of 15 online RTI applications forwarded with multiple queries and the information sought is voluminous in nature. The information sought will disproportationately divert the govt resources of Public Authority as defined in Section 7 (9) of RTI Act. The above RTI applications with multiple queries are repetetive in nature and more than 200+ RTI applications forwarded by you to this office have been answered/replied in past.
You may also note that your writ against your dismissal is pending before Hon'ble High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur and furnishing more information may impedes the procees of investigations/ proceedings/outcome of the court case. Therefore information is denied u/s 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act.
However, under section 2 (j) (i) of RTI Act 2005, you are given an opportunity to visit the school office with prior appointment on any Page 6 of 50 working day between 0930 hrs to 1330 hrs on or before 10 Aug 2020 to peruse the records/documents held in the school. Necessary inspection charges, as applicable have to be paid by you as per RTI Rules & Regulations."
Being dissatisfied, the complainant failed to file a First Appeal. The FAA order is not on record.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, complainant approached the Commission with the instant Complaint.
3. CIC/MODEF/C/2022/664380 Relevant facts emerging from complaint:
RTI application filed on : NIL CPIO replied on : 17.07.2020 First appeal filed on : Not on record
First Appellate Authority's order : Not on record 2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 01.12.2022 Information sought:
The Complainant filed an RTI application dated NIL (online) seeking the following information:
"1. It is apparent from the complaints of Mr BK Pandey Master (Eng) and Mr MS Dash Accountant of Sainik School Ambikapur intimating that information seeker had slyly taken some photographs of the duo from NCC Office.
2. In the backdrop of above it is requested to provide the following information by forwarding attested xerox copies :
(a) Letter constituting 4 to 5 Boards with one Master as POs and 3 to 4 Asst Masters or Admin Staff as members for the utilization of MoD Grant.
(b) Completed BPs of these 4 to 5 Boards and procurement effected by these boards along with invitation of quotations, raising of comprehensive quotation. shortlisting of lowest bidders and supply of items along with term and conditions and their dealership certificate.Page 7 of 50
(c) Payment Vouchers corroborating procurement of the items recommended by these boards.
(d) Compliance of DPM 2009 for procurement of the items recommended by these boards.
(e) Market Survey report of each product purchased by these boards.
(f) Qualifications/Expertise owned by POs of these procurement boards.
(g) Four staff members were present over there only two smelled a fowl in flash lights from the information seekers mobile and submitted a complaint.
(h) Statements from all the four present witnesses.
(i) Sanction obtained from CFA/IFA at HQ CAC, IAF on all these boards.
(j) Complaint/Note reflecting the failed software system present in school URC and the sanction obtained from the then Principal for restoration of failed software.
(k) Logics/evidences supporting the claim of shots taken from mobile of information seeker.
(m) Logic/Evidences/Complaints from all of three (Mr BK Pandey, Mr MS Dash and Mr Niranjan Dash) for not sharing very good relatiionship neither personally nor professionally.
(n) Authority Itr from the then Principal authorising Mr Ashok Kumar Saini to record audio/video of talks between him and information seeker on allegations levelled by him against the information seeker on various occasions.
(o) Logics/Evidences drawing conclusion that information seeker has planned something against any one of them or probably against all of them.
(p) Directive issued for not using camera enabled mobile phones with immediate effect.Page 8 of 50
(q) Reasons/Logics for not adhering booking in and out at school gate by academic staff coming to academic block other than their normal duty hours and action taken against them till date.
(r) Logics/Reasons giving opportunities to improve interpersonal relations with other staff.
(s) Complaints from any of the staff on poor relationship professionally and personally through out the tenure of information seeker.
(t) Specific reasons for conduct of inquiry after one month and within a day."
The CPIO furnished a reply to the complainant on 17.07.2020 stating as under:
"Please refer to your multiple online RTI applications bearing Registration No. MODEF/R/E/20/01117 dated 23 Mar MODEF/R/E/20/01172 dated 01 Apr MODEF/R/E/20/01186 dated 03 Apr MODEF/R/E/20/01515 dated 15 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01171 dated 01 Apr 2020, 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01178 dated 01 Apr 2020, 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01188 dated 03 Apr 2020, 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01553 dated 19 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01556 dated 19 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01661 dated 29 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01633 dated 27 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01251 dated 13 Apr 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01709 dated 03 Jun 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01687 dated 01 Jun 2020 and MODEF/R/E/20/01250 dated 12 Apr 2020, received by this school from Sainik Schools Society. Ministry of Defence, New Delhi by email on 25, 26 Jun 2020 and 01 Jul 2020.
There are a total of 15 online RTI applications forwarded with multiple queries and the information sought is voluminous in nature. The information sought will disproportionately divert the govt resources of Public Authority as defined in Section 7 (9) of RTI Act. The above RTI applications with multiple queries are repetitive in nature and more than 200+ RTI applications forwarded by you to this office have been answered/replied in past.
You may also note that your writ against your dismissal is pending before Hon'ble High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur and furnishing more information may impedes the procees of investigations/ proceedings/outcome of the court case. Therefore information is denied u/s 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act.Page 9 of 50
However, under section 2 (j) (i) of RTI Act 2005, you are given an opportunity to visit the school office with prior appointment on any working day between 0930 hrs to 1330 hrs on or before 10 Aug 2020 to peruse the records/documents held in the school. Necessary inspection charges, as applicable have to be paid by you as per RTI Rules & Regulations."
Being dissatisfied, the complainant failed to file a First Appeal. The FAA order is not on record.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, complainant approached the Commission with the instant Complaint.
4. CIC/MODEF/C/2022/664381 Relevant facts emerging from complaint:
RTI application filed on : NIL CPIO replied on : 17.07.2020 First appeal filed on : Not on record
First Appellate Authority's order : Not on record 2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 01.12.2022 Information sought:
The Complainant filed an RTI application dated NIL (online) seeking the following information:
"1. Please refer two Restricted Holidays granted to Asst Master (Comp Science) with leave address other than duty station and overstayed RH granted by Casual Leave by so called UDC of Main Office who had applied for DPC published vide Circular No. 23/2018-19 dated 25 Jan 2020. Administrative experience of the main office UDC is questionable and needs to be reviewed before conducting the DPC for available and desiring aspirants.
2. It is humbly requested to provide the attested xerox copy of the following information.
(a) Provisions under which permission to avail two days RH on 11 & 12 Oct 2013 away from duty station was sanctioned by the then Principal Page 10 of 50 and Offg Registrar (Mr Ravindra Tiwari) by striking off the remarks Not Eligible by the then Office Superintendent and information seeker.
(b) Provisions under which over stayed RH sanctioned to avail at leave station was regularised by granting three days casual leave (13 to 15 Oct 2013) with suffix on 16 Oct 2013.
(c) Provisions under which medical certificate was issued without any pathological report and medicine subscription with clear instructions of resuming duty on 18 Oct 2013.
(d) Audit observation report of this leave by LAO (A) Jabalpur.
(e) Specific reasons for choosing academic staff only to officiate the office of Registrar and Headmaster/Vice Principal despite having knowledge of their incapability and inefficiency.
(f) Provisions of selection of Principals for Sainik Schools and Inspecting Officers at Sainik School Society. Commodore Gorantla Rambabu (70342- T) was not having enough knowledge of Administration, Leave and CCS Rules.
(g) Proper regularisation of RH and extension granted with Casual Leave to Asst Master (Comp Science).
(h) Action taken against UDC of Main Office recommending grant of extension with Casual Leave to RH.
(i) Action taken against UDC of Main Office for recommending grant of extension with a medical certificate without Practitioners Registration Number.
(j) Correctly regularised leave with noting & provisions and copy of Part II order duly audited by LAO (A) Jabalpur along with leave record in service book with this leave entry.
(k) Action taken against Asst Master (Comp Science) for being ignorant with leave admissibility to him & CCS leave rules and applying for it absurdly.
(l) Establishment Section didnt check the complete record of leave to the credit of Asst Master (Comp Science).Page 11 of 50
(m) Specific reasons for not cross-checking medical certificate with issuing agency."
The CPIO furnished a reply to the complainant on 17.07.2020 stating as under:
"Please refer to your multiple online RTI applications bearing Registration No. MODEF/R/E/20/01117 dated 23 Mar MODEF/R/E/20/01172 dated 01 Apr MODEF/R/E/20/01186 dated 03 Apr MODEF/R/E/20/01515 dated 15 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01171 dated 01 Apr 2020, 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01178 dated 01 Apr 2020, 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01188 dated 03 Apr 2020, 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01553 dated 19 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01556 dated 19 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01661 dated 29 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01633 dated 27 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01251 dated 13 Apr 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01709 dated 03 Jun 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01687 dated 01 Jun 2020 and MODEF/R/E/20/01250 dated 12 Apr 2020, received by this school from Sainik Schools Society. Ministry of Defence, New Delhi by email on 25, 26 Jun 2020 and 01 Jul 2020.
There are a total of 15 online RTI applications forwarded with multiple queries and the information sought is voluminous in nature. The information sought will disproportionately divert the govt resources of Public Authority as defined in Section 7 (9) of RTI Act. The above RTI applications with multiple queries are repetitive in nature and more than 200+ RTI applications forwarded by you to this office have been answered/replied in past.
You may also note that your writ against your dismissal is pending before Hon'ble High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur and furnishing more information may impedes the procees of investigations/ proceedings/outcome of the court case. Therefore information is denied u/s 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act.
However, under section 2 (j) (i) of RTI Act 2005, you are given an opportunity to visit the school office with prior appointment on any working day between 0930 hrs to 1330 hrs on or before 10 Aug 2020 to peruse the records/documents held in the school. Necessary inspection charges, as applicable have to be paid by you as per RTI Rules & Regulations."Page 12 of 50
Being dissatisfied, the complainant failed to file a First Appeal. The FAA order is not on record.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, complainant approached the Commission with the instant Complaint.
5. CIC/MODEF/C/2022/664384 Relevant facts emerging from complaint:
RTI application filed on : NIL CPIO replied on : 17.07.2020 First appeal filed on : Not on record
First Appellate Authority's order : Not on record 2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 01.12.2022 Information sought:
The Complainant filed an RTI application dated NIL (online) seeking the following information:
"It is humbly requested to provide the attested xerox copy and Audio/Video CD of the following information on the BoS constituted to investigate the work place harassment and mental persecution of Mr Ashok K Saini LDC.
(a) Witness statements and evidences corroborating information seeker mocking and making fun of the said LDC.
(b) Record of instances with date, time and place wherein the said LDC was mocked and belittled.
(c) Witness statements and evidences of alleging some people of getting undue promotion from a lower to higher cadre (LDC to UDC).
(d) Evidence of this ironical remark (When Mr Ashok was in liquid form the information seeker was in Uniform in Armed Forces Services on said LDC.
(e) Audio/Video CD of the evidence submitted by the said LDC with authority letter of CFA to record and make audio/video CD.Page 13 of 50
(f) Record of many incidents of unfair. unjust and shoddy treatment reported by said LDC to the Officiating OC NCC.
(g) Record of academic staff officiating the post of Registrar, Headmaster and OC NCC during 01 Mar 13 31 Mar 2014.
(h) Record of ACR raised and advisories issued to the presiding officer of the said BoS for 2012-13 and 2013-14 sessions.
(i) Record of the initial appointment of the said PO as Asst Master (Eng) at Sainik School Nalanda of this BoS and further change of subject from English to Gen Science and further promotion as Master (Biology) with justification and approvals from concerned LBAs and Sainik School Society.
(j) Pencil work for deliberations upon allegations on information seeker without any evidence at para 5 A (a) & (b) of his inquiry report.
(k) Record and reasons of favours passed to the said LDC by PO at Para 5 B (a), (b) and (c) of his inquiry report.
(l) Record of appointments of the said LDC from his contractual employee at Sainik Schools Society, GE and LDC at Sainik School Ambikapur.
(m) Record of administrative experience of the said PO with mere service of eight years in Sainik Schools and no past record of service with any other Central/State Govt organization.
(n) Record of reply submitted by Lt Col Arvind Nautiyal Vice Principal & Rep of CPIO and Mr Bijay Kumar Pandey Senior Master Sainik School Ambikapur to CIC vide their order No. CIC/DODEF/A/2017/609519/SD dated 07 Feb 2019.
(o) Specific reasons for misleading Information to Information Shri Divya Prakash Sinha and in turn provoking him to shout and utter unwarranted and unparliamentary statements and language out of the purview of CIC."
The CPIO furnished a reply to the complainant on 17.07.2020 stating as under:
"Please refer to your multiple online RTI applications bearing Registration No. MODEF/R/E/20/01117 dated 23 Mar Page 14 of 50 MODEF/R/E/20/01172 dated 01 Apr MODEF/R/E/20/01186 dated 03 Apr MODEF/R/E/20/01515 dated 15 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01171 dated 01 Apr 2020, 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01178 dated 01 Apr 2020, 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01188 dated 03 Apr 2020, 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01553 dated 19 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01556 dated 19 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01661 dated 29 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01633 dated 27 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01251 dated 13 Apr 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01709 dated 03 Jun 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01687 dated 01 Jun 2020 and MODEF/R/E/20/01250 dated 12 Apr 2020, received by this school from Sainik Schools Society. Ministry of Defence, New Delhi by email on 25, 26 Jun 2020 and 01 Jul 2020.
There are a total of 15 online RTI applications forwarded with multiple queries and the information sought is voluminous in nature. The information sought will disproportionately divert the govt resources of Public Authority as defined in Section 7 (9) of RTI Act. The above RTI applications with multiple queries are repetitive in nature and more than 200+ RTI applications forwarded by you to this office have been answered/replied in past.
You may also note that your writ against your dismissal is pending before Hon'ble High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur and furnishing more information may impedes the procees of investigations/ proceedings/outcome of the court case. Therefore information is denied u/s 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act.
However, under section 2 (j) (i) of RTI Act 2005, you are given an opportunity to visit the school office with prior appointment on any working day between 0930 hrs to 1330 hrs on or before 10 Aug 2020 to peruse the records/documents held in the school. Necessary inspection charges, as applicable have to be paid by you as per RTI Rules & Regulations."
Being dissatisfied, the complainant failed to file a First Appeal. The FAA order is not on record.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, complainant approached the Commission with the instant Complaint.
6. CIC/ASINR/C/2022/664335/MODEF Relevant facts emerging from complaint:
Page 15 of 50RTI application filed on : NIL CPIO replied on : 17.07.2020 First appeal filed on : Not on record
First Appellate Authority's order : Not on record 2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 01.12.2022 Information sought:
The Complainant filed an RTI application dated NIL (online) seeking the following information:
"It is humbly requested to provide information related to tender of provisioning of catering services for the period of 2013-14 and Statement of Case justifying the reason for operation of Cadets Mess by school management.
On comparing both of these it was revealed that there are many contradictions in their claims mentioned in SOC and BOS conducted in 2013-14 for awarding tender of catering services to M/s A-One Sales Corporation. M/s Nalanda Trading Agency has made a tall claim of operating cadets mess at Sainik School Ambikapur in 2010-11.
In view of the foregoing some information is sought in attached RTI request to draw a conclusion on corruption & malversation and cronyism prevailing in award of tenders. It also gives a clear cut information that M/s A-One Sales Corporation New Delhi and M/s Nalanda Trading Agency, Bihar Sharif belongs to one entity and might be registered on different names."
The CPIO furnished a reply to the complainant on 17.07.2020 stating as under:
"Please refer to your multiple online RTI applications bearing Registration No. MODEF/R/E/20/01117 dated 23 Mar MODEF/R/E/20/01172 dated 01 Apr MODEF/R/E/20/01186 dated 03 Apr MODEF/R/E/20/01515 dated 15 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01171 dated 01 Apr 2020, 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01178 dated 01 Apr 2020, 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01188 dated 03 Apr 2020, 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01553 dated 19 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01556 dated 19 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01661 dated 29 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01633 dated 27 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01251 dated 13 Apr 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01709 dated 03 Jun 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01687 dated 01 Jun 2020 and MODEF/R/E/20/01250 dated 12 Apr 2020, received by Page 16 of 50 this school from Sainik Schools Society. Ministry of Defence, New Delhi by email on 25, 26 Jun 2020 and 01 Jul 2020.
There are a total of 15 online RTI applications forwarded with multiple queries and the information sought is voluminous in nature. The information sought will disproportionately divert the govt resources of Public Authority as defined in Section 7 (9) of RTI Act. The above RTI applications with multiple queries are repetitive in nature and more than 200+ RTI applications forwarded by you to this office have been answered/replied in past.
You may also note that your writ against your dismissal is pending before Hon'ble High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur and furnishing more information may impedes the procees of investigations/ proceedings/outcome of the court case. Therefore information is denied u/s 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act.
However, under section 2 (j) (i) of RTI Act 2005, you are given an opportunity to visit the school office with prior appointment on any working day between 0930 hrs to 1330 hrs on or before 10 Aug 2020 to peruse the records/documents held in the school. Necessary inspection charges, as applicable have to be paid by you as per RTI Rules & Regulations."
Being dissatisfied, the complainant failed to file a First Appeal. The FAA order is not on record.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, complainant approached the Commission with the instant Complaint.
7. CIC/MODEF/C/2022/664348 Relevant facts emerging from complaint:
RTI application filed on : NIL CPIO replied on : 17.07.2020 First appeal filed on : Not on record
First Appellate Authority's order : Not on record 2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 01.12.2022 Information sought:
Page 17 of 50The Complainant filed an RTI application dated NIL (online) seeking the following information:
"1. Please refer your letter No. SSAP/Est/RTI/1049/187 dated 03 June 2014 on my RTI dated 12 May 2014..
2. It is humbly requested to provide the attested xerox copy of the following:
(a) Noting and letters issued and circulated internally and externally for discontinuing the practice of using Red Beacon on staff car being used by Principal.
(b) Proposal received for conducting experiential classes from M/s Butterfly Fields and the inputs from Science and Maths teacher. Noting and sanction sought/accorded from any higher authority in chain of command.
(c) Letter received from Navy Childrens School, INS Rajaji stating their accord to provide designs and photographs of Science Laboratories to Sainik School Ambikapur.
(d) Designs and Photographs of Science Laboratories fetched from Navy Childrens School, INS Rajaji. Need to fetch designs and photographs by sending a Class IV employee (Gp D Officer) with bare understanding/knowledge of handling documents.
(e) Survey/literature demanded from any agency to ascertain its utility or Movement Order of the individual proceeded to survey and understand the requirement.
(f) Erstwhile Registrar and Headmaster had discussed the issue of taking suit by Principal for his son in information seekers presence.
Noting/Sanction of authorising issue of blazer to school staff.
(g) Resignation letter and approval thereon of first NCC Clerk on State Govts Roll.
(h) Complete proceedings of the Bol conducted in the altercation between NCC JCO and Asst Master (Gen Sci) & ANO in March 2014.
Page 18 of 50(j) Movement Order of the staff brought by Col Karia for conduct of NCC B Certificate Examination (i.e. Copy checking, compilation of marks and preparing results) otherwise the list of staff detailed by Sainik School Ambikapur.
(k) Rules, SOP and the DPC proceedings duly approved by competent authority for DPC conducted in first quarter of 2013.
(m) Complaint received and Proceedings of preliminary enquiry and the norms which were considered to conduct comprehensive enquiry against the Master (Eng) nee Asst Master (Eng) by Asst Master (Gen Sci) who belongs to Tilaiya in 2013-14.
(n) Complete proceedings of the formal enquiry conducted by the Offg Registrar against Quarter Master in the hit case reported by the Driver.
(o) Surprise checks conducted from August 2012 to August 2013 during the period of LDC granted inter school transfer to Sainik School Chittorgarh holding charges of QM Stores and procurements/issue of stores."
The CPIO furnished a reply to the complainant on 17.07.2020 stating as under:
"Please refer to your multiple online RTI applications bearing Registration No. MODEF/R/E/20/01117 dated 23 Mar MODEF/R/E/20/01172 dated 01 Apr MODEF/R/E/20/01186 dated 03 Apr MODEF/R/E/20/01515 dated 15 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01171 dated 01 Apr 2020, 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01178 dated 01 Apr 2020, 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01188 dated 03 Apr 2020, 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01553 dated 19 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01556 dated 19 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01661 dated 29 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01633 dated 27 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01251 dated 13 Apr 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01709 dated 03 Jun 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01687 dated 01 Jun 2020 and MODEF/R/E/20/01250 dated 12 Apr 2020, received by this school from Sainik Schools Society. Ministry of Defence, New Delhi by email on 25, 26 Jun 2020 and 01 Jul 2020.
There are a total of 15 online RTI applications forwarded with multiple queries and the information sought is voluminous in nature. The information sought will disproportionately divert the govt resources of Public Authority as defined in Section 7 (9) of RTI Act. The above RTI applications with multiple queries are repetitive in nature and more than Page 19 of 50 200+ RTI applications forwarded by you to this office have been answered/replied in past.
You may also note that your writ against your dismissal is pending before Hon'ble High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur and furnishing more information may impedes the procees of investigations/ proceedings/outcome of the court case. Therefore information is denied u/s 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act.
However, under section 2 (j) (i) of RTI Act 2005, you are given an opportunity to visit the school office with prior appointment on any working day between 0930 hrs to 1330 hrs on or before 10 Aug 2020 to peruse the records/documents held in the school. Necessary inspection charges, as applicable have to be paid by you as per RTI Rules & Regulations."
Being dissatisfied, the complainant failed to file a First Appeal. The FAA order is not on record.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, complainant approached the Commission with the instant Complaint.
8. CIC/MODEF/C/2022/664353 Relevant facts emerging from complaint:
RTI application filed on : NIL CPIO replied on : 17.07.2020 First appeal filed on : Not on record
First Appellate Authority's order : Not on record 2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 01.12.2022 Information sought:
The Complainant filed an RTI application dated NIL (online) seeking the following information:
"1. Please refer your letter No. SSAP/Est/RTI/1049/2349 dated 14 December 2017 on my RTI dated 22 September 2017..
2. It is humbly requested to provide the attested xerox copies of the following:Page 20 of 50
(a) Procedures on procurement.laid down in DPM 2009 is known to information seeker by virtue of being an active member of Indian Air Force from 1985 to 2005. Procedure followed at your end is required to ascertain the anomalies.
(b) Complete advertisement for procurement of portacabins uploaded on the school website containing RFP Number & Date, Sale & RFP Document Purchase price along with calculation for the same, Date and Address of pre-bid conference, Officer/Represative detailed to conduct pre-bid conference, Last Date for Submission of written queries for clarifications, release of response to clarifications, last date for submission of bids with address, EMD (along with calculation of EMD), Bid validity period, opening of technical bids, place, time & date of opening of financial proposals received in response to tender/RFP advertisement, convening orders indicating all detailments of personnel and time given for completion of work. Taking Over authority detailment and report submitted.
(c) Performance Guarantee demanded (along with calculation) & rendered by the bidder executing the work, duration of performance guarantee and date of redeeming performance guarantee.
(d) Negotiations, if any on final financial proposals and officer/representative detailed for the same.
(e) Payment Vouchers related to the payment of this procurement bid/tender/proposal and sanction sought & received."
The CPIO furnished a reply to the complainant on 17.07.2020 stating as under:
"Please refer to your multiple online RTI applications bearing Registration No. MODEF/R/E/20/01117 dated 23 Mar MODEF/R/E/20/01172 dated 01 Apr MODEF/R/E/20/01186 dated 03 Apr MODEF/R/E/20/01515 dated 15 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01171 dated 01 Apr 2020, 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01178 dated 01 Apr 2020, 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01188 dated 03 Apr 2020, 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01553 dated 19 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01556 dated 19 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01661 dated 29 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01633 dated 27 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01251 dated 13 Apr 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01709 dated 03 Jun 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01687 dated 01 Jun 2020 and MODEF/R/E/20/01250 dated 12 Apr 2020, received by Page 21 of 50 this school from Sainik Schools Society. Ministry of Defence, New Delhi by email on 25, 26 Jun 2020 and 01 Jul 2020.
There are a total of 15 online RTI applications forwarded with multiple queries and the information sought is voluminous in nature. The information sought will disproportionately divert the govt resources of Public Authority as defined in Section 7 (9) of RTI Act. The above RTI applications with multiple queries are repetitive in nature and more than 200+ RTI applications forwarded by you to this office have been answered/replied in past.
You may also note that your writ against your dismissal is pending before Hon'ble High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur and furnishing more information may impedes the procees of investigations/ proceedings/outcome of the court case. Therefore information is denied u/s 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act.
However, under section 2 (j) (i) of RTI Act 2005, you are given an opportunity to visit the school office with prior appointment on any working day between 0930 hrs to 1330 hrs on or before 10 Aug 2020 to peruse the records/documents held in the school. Necessary inspection charges, as applicable have to be paid by you as per RTI Rules & Regulations."
Being dissatisfied, the complainant failed to file a First Appeal. The FAA order is not on record.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, complainant approached the Commission with the instant Complaint.
9. CIC/MODEF/C/2022/664355 Relevant facts emerging from complaint:
RTI application filed on : NIL CPIO replied on : 17.07.2020 First appeal filed on : Not on record
First Appellate Authority's order : Not on record 2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 01.12.2022 Information sought:
Page 22 of 50The Complainant filed an RTI application dated NIL (online) seeking the following information:
"1. Please refer your letter No. SSAP/Est/RTI/1049/242 dated 24 June 2014 on my RTI dated 26 May 2014.
2. It is humbly requested to provide the attested xerox copy of the following:
(a) Letter No. SSAP/Est/Pers/JKS/2038 dated 30 March 2014.
(b) Unsolicited disturbing Short Message produced by Master (Biology) Offg Registrar.
(c) Complaint of Master (Biology) Offg Registrar depicting reasons for construing apprehensions that short message sent by information seeker was with suspect and ulterior motives.
(d) Complaints against information seekers activities in and around the contact areas of the school negatively impacting the cadets.
(e) Complaints by cadets and their parents or Academic/Admin Staff or any Officer on use of language unbecoming of a staff of Sainik School within the hearing of cadets in the NCC Office.
(f) Standard operation action in SSS R & R for securing school property in unauthorized possession of terminated staff who had not rendered clearance.
(g) Report produced/given against information seeker going incommunicado.
(h) Authorization letter allowing any/many admin/academic staff to carry Spy Camera Pen, Dictaphone or any other audio/video recording gadget while on duty to School/Hostel premises.
(j) Authorization letter allowing any Computer Science Academic staff (Master and Asst Master) to disable many functions on the system of information seeker on 05 March 2014.Page 23 of 50
(k) List of all the sensitive and critical documents and files held with the then Principal and incumbent Principal and the governing rule in SSS R & R.
(l) Sequence/Chronology of action taken on my applications dated 26 March 2014 and 19 June 2014."
The CPIO furnished a reply to the complainant on 17.07.2020 stating as under:
"Please refer to your multiple online RTI applications bearing Registration No. MODEF/R/E/20/01117 dated 23 Mar MODEF/R/E/20/01172 dated 01 Apr MODEF/R/E/20/01186 dated 03 Apr MODEF/R/E/20/01515 dated 15 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01171 dated 01 Apr 2020, 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01178 dated 01 Apr 2020, 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01188 dated 03 Apr 2020, 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01553 dated 19 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01556 dated 19 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01661 dated 29 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01633 dated 27 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01251 dated 13 Apr 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01709 dated 03 Jun 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01687 dated 01 Jun 2020 and MODEF/R/E/20/01250 dated 12 Apr 2020, received by this school from Sainik Schools Society. Ministry of Defence, New Delhi by email on 25, 26 Jun 2020 and 01 Jul 2020.
There are a total of 15 online RTI applications forwarded with multiple queries and the information sought is voluminous in nature. The information sought will disproportionately divert the govt resources of Public Authority as defined in Section 7 (9) of RTI Act. The above RTI applications with multiple queries are repetitive in nature and more than 200+ RTI applications forwarded by you to this office have been answered/replied in past.
You may also note that your writ against your dismissal is pending before Hon'ble High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur and furnishing more information may impedes the procees of investigations/ proceedings/outcome of the court case. Therefore information is denied u/s 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act.
However, under section 2 (j) (i) of RTI Act 2005, you are given an opportunity to visit the school office with prior appointment on any working day between 0930 hrs to 1330 hrs on or before 10 Aug 2020 to peruse the records/documents held in the school. Necessary inspection Page 24 of 50 charges, as applicable have to be paid by you as per RTI Rules & Regulations."
Being dissatisfied, the complainant failed to file a First Appeal. The FAA order is not on record.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, complainant approached the Commission with the instant Complaint.
10. CIC/MODEF/C/2022/664358 Relevant facts emerging from complaint:
RTI application filed on : NIL CPIO replied on : 17.07.2020 First appeal filed on : Not on record
First Appellate Authority's order : Not on record 2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 01.12.2022 Information sought:
The Complainant filed an RTI application dated NIL (online) seeking the following information:
"1. Please refer your letter No. SSAP/Est/RTI/1049/150 dated 22 May 2014 on my RTI dated 12 May 2014.
2. It is humbly requested to provide the attested xerox copy of the following:
(a) Nominal Roll of admin staff detailed to work with their designations in the Accounts, QM, Academic, NCC & Main Office in 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012- 13 and 2013-14 and on this date.
(b) Establishment/Manning status of Accounts Section as per SSS R & R in 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 and 2013-14 sessions and as on date.
(c) Demand/Intimation Notice sent by TDS Central Processing Cell, Aaykar Bhawan, Sector-1, Vaishali, Ghaziabad for the financial years 2010-11, 2011- 12, 2012-13 and 2013-14.Page 25 of 50
(d) Payment Vouchers of TDS for financial years 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-
13, 2013-14 along with BRC statement.
(e) Details of dereliction of duty incidences of Accountant described in Counselling letter bearing reference number SSAP/Est/Pers/MSD/1143 dated 21 July 2012.
(f) Action initiated and applied for payment of Seventh Pay Commission arears. Letters sent to LAO (Army) Jabalpur with regard to implementation of provisions of Seventh Pay Commission.
(g) Recommendations and Provisions of enhancement of Grade Pay of Master (Eng) conferred with National Teachers Award in 2019 and audit clearance report on same by LAO (Army) and in turn CDA Jabalpur.
(h) Details of altercation/affray/untoward incident which took place in Accounts Section among two staff members of Accounts Section on 23 March 2020 and inquiry ordered or convened to enquire into the circumstances, findings of the inquiry and action taken.
(j) Dues to and against me worked out by Accounts Section."
The CPIO furnished a reply to the complainant on 17.07.2020 stating as under:
"Please refer to your multiple online RTI applications bearing Registration No. MODEF/R/E/20/01117 dated 23 Mar MODEF/R/E/20/01172 dated 01 Apr MODEF/R/E/20/01186 dated 03 Apr MODEF/R/E/20/01515 dated 15 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01171 dated 01 Apr 2020, 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01178 dated 01 Apr 2020, 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01188 dated 03 Apr 2020, 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01553 dated 19 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01556 dated 19 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01661 dated 29 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01633 dated 27 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01251 dated 13 Apr 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01709 dated 03 Jun 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01687 dated 01 Jun 2020 and MODEF/R/E/20/01250 dated 12 Apr 2020, received by this school from Sainik Schools Society. Ministry of Defence, New Delhi by email on 25, 26 Jun 2020 and 01 Jul 2020.
There are a total of 15 online RTI applications forwarded with multiple queries and the information sought is voluminous in nature. The information sought will disproportionately divert the govt resources of Public Authority as defined in Section 7 (9) of RTI Act. The above RTI Page 26 of 50 applications with multiple queries are repetitive in nature and more than 200+ RTI applications forwarded by you to this office have been answered/replied in past.
You may also note that your writ against your dismissal is pending before Hon'ble High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur and furnishing more information may impedes the procees of investigations/ proceedings/outcome of the court case. Therefore information is denied u/s 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act.
However, under section 2 (j) (i) of RTI Act 2005, you are given an opportunity to visit the school office with prior appointment on any working day between 0930 hrs to 1330 hrs on or before 10 Aug 2020 to peruse the records/documents held in the school. Necessary inspection charges, as applicable have to be paid by you as per RTI Rules & Regulations."
Being dissatisfied, the complainant failed to file a First Appeal. The FAA order is not on record.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, complainant approached the Commission with the instant Complaint.
11.CIC/MODEF/C/2022/664363 Relevant facts emerging from complaint:
RTI application filed on : NIL CPIO replied on : 17.07.2020 First appeal filed on : Not on record
First Appellate Authority's order : Not on record 2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 01.12.2022 Information sought:
The Complainant filed an RTI application dated NIL (online) seeking the following information:
"1. Please refer your letter No. SSAP/Est/RTI/1049/416 dated 12 Aug 2014 on my RTI dated 16 July 2014.Page 27 of 50
2. It is humbly requested to provide the attested xerox copy of the following:
(a) Witnesses and Evidences produced by aggrieved LDC supporting his accusation/allegation of mental harassment at para 2 and 3 of his application addressed to Principal Sainik School Ambikapur seeking redressal.
(b) Any written complaint of mental harassment by the aggrieved prior to 26th February 2014.
(c) Witness and evidences produced by the complainants i.e. Master (Eng) & Accountant.
(d) Viable causes of Master (Eng) having suspicion on the information seeker (Office Superintendent) of fabricating and planting evidences with ulterior motives.
(e) Details (Date, Time, Place, Witnesses and Evidences) of occasions when he was subjected to the information seekers ire and hostilities.
Written complaints to these accusations/allegations.
(f) Occasions and instances of deliberate non-cooperation with Master (Eng).
(g) Occasions and instances of provoking him with unkind & unwarranted comments and observations within Master (Eng) hearing, written complaints to this effect by him, if any.
(h) Written Statement/Name of witness revealing the fact that information seeker was indulged in nasty and vicious abuse to Master (Eng).
(j) Master (Eng) didnt notice information seeker calling Mr Sachin Choudhary by gesturing as claimed by Accountant in his complaint.
(k) Detailed statement by Accountant describing the smack felt/realized by him of mischief and malafied intention of information seeker with reasons.
(l) Main Office UDC didnt notice anything and had nothing to complain against information seeker.
Page 28 of 50(m) Order declaring Account Section assembly point for finalizing and benchmarking the reasonableness of installation of Solar Plant bids price and was Main Office UDC member to that BO0.
(n) Accountant mentioned at para 2 (b) the UDC of Main Office was there to discuss the procedure of restoration of software of School URC. Letter/Intimation reporting crash of URC software either by Accountant or by UDC of Main Office.
(o) Exhibit reflecting Express permission of Principal permitting Master (Eng) to approach Accountant in Accounts Section for benchmarking the reasonableness of benchmarking of Solar Plant bids price.
(p) Complaint letter submitted by UDC of Main Office as claimed by Presiding Officer in Boards conclusion at para 5 (a) & (b) of one-man Board ordered on 28 February 2014 vide SSAP/Est/Pers/JKS.
(q) Any written statement by Mr Rajeev, GE/any other witness (GE) confirming vent of ire, abuses and threatening to Master (Eng) at main gate of school in the audience.
(r) Any specific detailment order as Audio/Video recorder/shooter to the LDC alleging/accusing information seeker of mental harassment."
The CPIO furnished a reply to the complainant on 17.07.2020 stating as under:
"Please refer to your multiple online RTI applications bearing Registration No. MODEF/R/E/20/01117 dated 23 Mar MODEF/R/E/20/01172 dated 01 Apr MODEF/R/E/20/01186 dated 03 Apr MODEF/R/E/20/01515 dated 15 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01171 dated 01 Apr 2020, 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01178 dated 01 Apr 2020, 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01188 dated 03 Apr 2020, 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01553 dated 19 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01556 dated 19 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01661 dated 29 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01633 dated 27 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01251 dated 13 Apr 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01709 dated 03 Jun 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01687 dated 01 Jun 2020 and MODEF/R/E/20/01250 dated 12 Apr 2020, received by this school from Sainik Schools Society. Ministry of Defence, New Delhi by email on 25, 26 Jun 2020 and 01 Jul 2020.Page 29 of 50
There are a total of 15 online RTI applications forwarded with multiple queries and the information sought is voluminous in nature. The information sought will disproportionately divert the govt resources of Public Authority as defined in Section 7 (9) of RTI Act. The above RTI applications with multiple queries are repetitive in nature and more than 200+ RTI applications forwarded by you to this office have been answered/replied in past.
You may also note that your writ against your dismissal is pending before Hon'ble High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur and furnishing more information may impedes the procees of investigations/ proceedings/outcome of the court case. Therefore information is denied u/s 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act.
However, under section 2 (j) (i) of RTI Act 2005, you are given an opportunity to visit the school office with prior appointment on any working day between 0930 hrs to 1330 hrs on or before 10 Aug 2020 to peruse the records/documents held in the school. Necessary inspection charges, as applicable have to be paid by you as per RTI Rules & Regulations."
Being dissatisfied, the complainant failed to file a First Appeal. The FAA order is not on record.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, complainant approached the Commission with the instant Complaint.
12.CIC/MODEF/C/2022/664367 Relevant facts emerging from complaint:
RTI application filed on : NIL CPIO replied on : 17.07.2020 First appeal filed on : Not on record
First Appellate Authority's order : Not on record 2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 01.12.2022 Information sought:
The Complainant filed an RTI application dated NIL (online) seeking the following information:Page 30 of 50
"1. Please provide the attested xerox copies of the following:
(a) Original leave application along with General Application, if any of appellant.
(b) E Mail from appellant requesting extension of leave with Mail-In stamp and Mail-In Register.
(c) E Mail from appellant requesting further extension of leave with Mail-
In stamp and Mail-In Register.
(d) Leave application to regularize the extended leave of appellant.
(e) Medical Certificate issued by Medical Officer to appellant and his father.
(f) Leaf of Attendance Register reflecting A mark against the appellants name.
(g) Original leave application of Nursing Assistant.
(h) Leave application from Nursing Assistant of 28 Jun 2013 and evidences of presenting it on 07 Dec 2013 by information seeker.
(i) Medical Certificate submitted by Nursing Assistant for regularizing his extended leave.
(j) Leaf of Attendance Register reflecting empty cells against the Nursing Assistants name.
(k) Leave application of LDC DK Pandey reflecting availing intervening RH with Earned Leave.
(l) 04 days HPL application of information seeker on medical grounds in the month of August 2013 and submitted medical certificate.
(m) Leave application of the then Principal availed in the month of Dec 2013 and surrendering of leave application.
(n) Outstation RH application of Asst Master (Comp Science) availed in the month of Oct 2013 and regularisation of extension with Casual Leave along with Medical Certificate.
Page 31 of 50(0) TRACES (TDS Demand Letter) of 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13 along with approved payment vouchers and details of cheques/electronic transfers.
(p) Rule and regulation governing appeal against superior officer and non conveying the outcome to superior officer in SSS (R & R) and CCS.
(q) Rule for not allowing the superior officer to participate in appeal and non confirmation/corraboration of evidences produced by appellant against superior officer.
(r) Rule for not demanding any evidence in support of appellants claims in appeal.
(s) Any specific rule in SSS (R & R) for detailing inquiry/investigation officer/incharges only from founder/old staff.
(t) Administrative qualifications and experiences of Mr BK Pandey Master (Eng), Mr MK Tripathi Master (Bio) and Mr Ravindra Tiwari Asst Master (Hindi).
(u) Rule for comment gathering on appeal in absence of allegated officer & information seeker."
The CPIO furnished a reply to the complainant on 17.07.2020 stating as under:
"Please refer to your multiple online RTI applications bearing Registration No. MODEF/R/E/20/01117 dated 23 Mar MODEF/R/E/20/01172 dated 01 Apr MODEF/R/E/20/01186 dated 03 Apr MODEF/R/E/20/01515 dated 15 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01171 dated 01 Apr 2020, 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01178 dated 01 Apr 2020, 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01188 dated 03 Apr 2020, 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01553 dated 19 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01556 dated 19 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01661 dated 29 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01633 dated 27 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01251 dated 13 Apr 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01709 dated 03 Jun 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01687 dated 01 Jun 2020 and MODEF/R/E/20/01250 dated 12 Apr 2020, received by this school from Sainik Schools Society. Ministry of Defence, New Delhi by email on 25, 26 Jun 2020 and 01 Jul 2020.Page 32 of 50
There are a total of 15 online RTI applications forwarded with multiple queries and the information sought is voluminous in nature. The information sought will disproportionately divert the govt resources of Public Authority as defined in Section 7 (9) of RTI Act. The above RTI applications with multiple queries are repetitive in nature and more than 200+ RTI applications forwarded by you to this office have been answered/replied in past.
You may also note that your writ against your dismissal is pending before Hon'ble High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur and furnishing more information may impedes the procees of investigations/ proceedings/outcome of the court case. Therefore information is denied u/s 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act.
However, under section 2 (j) (i) of RTI Act 2005, you are given an opportunity to visit the school office with prior appointment on any working day between 0930 hrs to 1330 hrs on or before 10 Aug 2020 to peruse the records/documents held in the school. Necessary inspection charges, as applicable have to be paid by you as per RTI Rules & Regulations."
Being dissatisfied, the complainant failed to file a First Appeal. The FAA order is not on record.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, complainant approached the Commission with the instant Complaint.
13.CIC/MODEF/C/2022/664368 Relevant facts emerging from complaint:
RTI application filed on : NIL CPIO replied on : 17.07.2020 First appeal filed on : Not on record
First Appellate Authority's order : Not on record 2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 01.12.2022 Information sought:
The Complainant filed an RTI application dated NIL (online) seeking the following information:Page 33 of 50
"(a) Name, Designation and Section of the participants of DPC for office Superintendent.
(b) Any aspirant working with main office had been shifted to other section for uncanvassed and smooth conduct of DPC, if yes then details otherwise personal application of the aspirant informing authorities his participation in DPC.
(c) Had service books and personal file of the aspirants searched and vetted thoroughly for any procedural lapse in past, if yes please forward the report on same and detailed officer to search and check their service documents and personal file and if no, then reasons for the same.
(d) Go ahead sanction from Sainik Schools Society and Local Board of Administration of Sainik School Ambikapur for conduct of DPC of office Superintendent.
(e) The authority requested to provide question paper for written, practical and skill test for DPC so as to make sure fair, transparent and smooth conduct of DPC.
(f) Since this DPC is for the key position of school it is mandatory to have fair knowlege of all the three major sections (i.e. Main Office, Quarter Master and Accounts) of the school.
(g) Policy, instructions and SOP for conduction of DPC by competent authority.
(h) Circulars released and circulated by competent authority of the school inviting aspirants for the DPC of office superintendent.
(i) Specific reasons for seeking conduct of DPC as elucidated to Sainik Schools Society after a gap of almost six years."
The CPIO furnished a reply to the complainant on 17.07.2020 stating as under:
"Please refer to your multiple online RTI applications bearing Registration No. MODEF/R/E/20/01117 dated 23 Mar MODEF/R/E/20/01172 dated 01 Apr MODEF/R/E/20/01186 dated 03 Apr MODEF/R/E/20/01515 dated 15 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01171 dated 01 Apr 2020, 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01178 dated 01 Apr 2020, 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01188 dated 03 Apr 2020, 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01553 Page 34 of 50 dated 19 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01556 dated 19 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01661 dated 29 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01633 dated 27 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01251 dated 13 Apr 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01709 dated 03 Jun 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01687 dated 01 Jun 2020 and MODEF/R/E/20/01250 dated 12 Apr 2020, received by this school from Sainik Schools Society. Ministry of Defence, New Delhi by email on 25, 26 Jun 2020 and 01 Jul 2020.
There are a total of 15 online RTI applications forwarded with multiple queries and the information sought is voluminous in nature. The information sought will disproportionately divert the govt resources of Public Authority as defined in Section 7 (9) of RTI Act. The above RTI applications with multiple queries are repetitive in nature and more than 200+ RTI applications forwarded by you to this office have been answered/replied in past.
You may also note that your writ against your dismissal is pending before Hon'ble High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur and furnishing more information may impedes the procees of investigations/ proceedings/outcome of the court case. Therefore information is denied u/s 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act.
However, under section 2 (j) (i) of RTI Act 2005, you are given an opportunity to visit the school office with prior appointment on any working day between 0930 hrs to 1330 hrs on or before 10 Aug 2020 to peruse the records/documents held in the school. Necessary inspection charges, as applicable have to be paid by you as per RTI Rules & Regulations."
Being dissatisfied, the complainant failed to file a First Appeal. The FAA order is not on record.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, complainant approached the Commission with the instant Complaint.
14.CIC/MODEF/C/2022/664371 Relevant facts emerging from complaint:
RTI application filed on : NIL
CPIO replied on : 17.07.2020
First appeal filed on : Not on record
Page 35 of 50
First Appellate Authority's order : Not on record 2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 01.12.2022 Information sought:
The Complainant filed an RTI application dated NIL (online) seeking the following information:
"(a) Person and section detailed to operate Govt e-Marketing portal, date of adoption and implementation of GeM at your end.
(b) Reasons assuring change in taxation procedure of the salaries of employee after 2014.
(c) Date and letter of submission of NPS deductions from employee as well as employer to the NSDL and specific reasons for delay in submission. Interest on delayed submission of NPS subscriptions deducted since 2004.
(d) Payment Vouchers for delayed submission of TDS in 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 in 2014 alongwith demand notices from Income Tax Department. And letter of exemption of fine levied on Sainik School Ambikapur otherwise Payment Voucher for submission of fine and the budget head for the payment of same.
(e) Note initiating wrong/against the rule pay fixation of national teachers awardee of 2019 and complete communication on the same with LAO (A) Jabalpur & CDA Jabalpur. Specific reasons for not initiating recovery with interest from the beneficiary and the person accountable for this lapse and action initiated against defulter.
(f) Complete communication on non disbursal of seventh pay commission arrears to all the employees and person responsible for this delay and action taken against defaulter by the competent authority of the school."
The CPIO furnished a reply to the complainant on 17.07.2020 stating as under:
"Please refer to your multiple online RTI applications bearing Registration No. MODEF/R/E/20/01117 dated 23 Mar MODEF/R/E/20/01172 dated 01 Apr MODEF/R/E/20/01186 dated 03 Apr MODEF/R/E/20/01515 dated 15 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01171 dated 01 Apr 2020, 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01178 dated 01 Apr 2020, 2020, Page 36 of 50 MODEF/R/E/20/01188 dated 03 Apr 2020, 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01553 dated 19 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01556 dated 19 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01661 dated 29 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01633 dated 27 May 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01251 dated 13 Apr 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01709 dated 03 Jun 2020, MODEF/R/E/20/01687 dated 01 Jun 2020 and MODEF/R/E/20/01250 dated 12 Apr 2020, received by this school from Sainik Schools Society. Ministry of Defence, New Delhi by email on 25, 26 Jun 2020 and 01 Jul 2020.
There are total of 15 online RTI applications forwarded with multiple queries and the information sought is voluminous in nature. The information sought will disproportionately divert the govt resources of Public Authority as defined in Section 7 (9) of RTI Act. The above RTI applications with multiple queries are repetitive in nature and more than 200+ RTI applications forwarded by you to this office have been answered/replied in past.
You may also note that your writ against your dismissal is pending before Hon'ble High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur and furnishing more information may impedes the procees of investigations/ proceedings/outcome of the court case. Therefore information is denied u/s 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act.
However, under section 2 (j) (i) of RTI Act 2005, you are given an opportunity to visit the school office with prior appointment on any working day between 0930 hrs to 1330 hrs on or before 10 Aug 2020 to peruse the records/documents held in the school. Necessary inspection charges, as applicable have to be paid by you as per RTI Rules & Regulations."
Being dissatisfied, the complainant failed to file a First Appeal. The FAA order is not on record.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, complainant approached the Commission with the instant Complaint.
15.CIC/MODEF/C/2023/602976 Relevant facts emerging from complaint:
RTI application filed on : 06.10.2021
CPIO replied on : 12.11.2021
Page 37 of 50
First appeal filed on : NIL
First Appellate Authority's order : 27.01.2022 2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 17.01.2023 Information sought:
The Complainant filed an RTI application dated 06.10.2021 (online) seeking the following information:
"1. I will ever remain indebted to your kind honor to help me in busting the nexus between the Vendors/Contractors and second member detailed to open financial/Commercial bids for various supplies of your School. Expression pertaining to allegation of corruption cannot be exhaustively defined and this thing is in fact true. The RTI Act is to step- in-aid to establish the society governed by law in which immoral acts like corruption has no place. The Act envisages a transparent public office. Therefore even in organizations which are exempt from the provisions of the Act, in terms of the notification issued under section 24 (4) of the Act, stills information which relates to corruption or the information which excludes the allegation of corruption would be relevant information & cannot be denied for the reasons that the organization is exempted under the Act.
(a) It is humbly requested to provide the attested xerox copies of Advertisement, Sale of Tender Forms, Tender Form Register reflecting sale for this contract, Calculation of EMD, Demand of Performance Guarantee, Documents demanded and complete BPs without blackening/blanking any information for providing catering services in Cadets Mess for 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2015-16
(b) It is further requested to provide the attested xerox copies of the following docs demanded/provided by Vendors/Contractors PAN Card, ITR of last 03 years, Annual GST Return, Requisite Experience, Bank Account Details. EMD Details, Tender Form fee, Specimen Signature of Contractor/Vendor in tender form, FSSAI, Labour,, GST, Establishment/Firms, EPF & ESIC Registration. TIN/TAN No, Menu/Complete list of food items to be provided in five meals of the Cadets, Special Menu, Extra Special Menu (along with rates) in r/o all the bidders. Attendance sheet of the day reflecting Contractors/Vendors/Suppliers attending the bid/tender opening along with Main Gate Visitors Register.Page 38 of 50
2. The flow of information should not be incorrectly withheld by taking refuge under the exemption clause contained in Section 8 (1) (d) (e), (g),
(h), (j) & 11 of the Act. The CPIO has to act consciously & avoid obstructing with a mala fide intention. Any information which could be produced in the court of law as evidence under Sec 74 of Indian Evidence Act 1872 cannot be withheld under the Sec 8 (1) (d), (e), (g), (h) & (j) and
11. Being the custodian of the information, it is mandatory on your part to decide judicious supply.
3. Plz inform the name, designation and office address of the officers, whose assistance was sought by CPIO in connection with taking decision and supplying information desired under section-5(4) read with 5(5) of Act & also furnish an affidavit declaring the veracity & authenticity of the information supplied to Honble High Court & me. Evasion of reply within the stipulated period attracts the provision of Sec 166A of IPC 1860."
The CPIO furnished a reply to the complainant on 12.11.2021 stating as under:
"Refer your online RTI request No. MODEF/R/E/21/03144 dated 06 Oct 2021.
The information sought by you vide your ibid application pertains to a period of seven years and is voluminous in nature. Therefore, the information is not provided under section 7(9) of the RTI Act 2005.
However, under section 2 (j) (i) of the RTI Act 2005, you are given an opportunity to visit the school office with prior appointment on any working day between 0930 hrs to 1330 hrs on or before 30 Nov 2021 to peruse the records/documents held in the school. Necessary inspection charges, as applicable have to be paid by you as per the RTI Rules & Regulations."
Being dissatisfied, the complainant filed a First Appeal dated NIL. The FAA vide its order dated 27.01.2022, upheld the reply of CPIO.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, complainant approached the Commission with the instant Complaint.
16.CIC/MODEF/C/2023/602978 Relevant facts emerging from complaint:
Page 39 of 50RTI application filed on : 25.10.2021 CPIO replied on : 08.11.2021 First appeal filed on : NIL
First Appellate Authority's order : 27.01.2022 2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 17.01.2023 Information sought:
The Complainant filed an RTI application dated 25.10.2021 (online) seeking the following information:
"1. The attested (R) attested xerox of the following information on release of vacancy of Mess Manager, Catering Assistant & Associated Mess Staff at Sainik School Ambikapur be supplied at the earliest. Wrong, vague, false, ambiguous or specious information passed dishonestly/deliberately itself are the testimonials to corrupt practices being followed. None of the information regarding appointment, transfer & promotions are protected or exempted from disclosure so as to maintain transparency and accountability. Appointments, Promotions and Transfers always remain in public domain. Please take cognizance of 1/69/2007-IR and 1/4/2008-IR dtd 27 Feb & 25 Apr 2008.
(a) Request seeking release of vacancy of Mess Manager, Catering Assistant and associated Mess Staff by SS Ambikapur since 2015 from Sainik Schools Society with noting at originator office.
(b) Letters releasing vacany of Mess Manager, Catering Assistant and Associated Mess Staff by Sainik Schools Society with noting at their end.
(c) Justifications moved to various offices to the up line/CFA for approval alongwith their observations/corrections/approvals.
(d) Attested copy of SOP on DPC for the post of Mess Manager & Catering Asst along with policy letter number and date.
(e) Notice/circular published by SS Ambikapur seeking willingness for DPC from the existing staff in the school along with feeder cadre information & essential qualification with supporting document.
(f) Applications confirming willingness from the existing staff.
(g) Staff found eligible/not eligible for DPC along with noting prepared & convening order of DPC.Page 40 of 50
(h) List and attendance register of the regular, ad-hoc & contractual employees running the mess since 2015 and also the orders issued on engagement of regular staff in Mess as Mess Manager & Mess Waiters.
(i) Provide the names of staff engaged in drafting QR for feeder cadre if not as per SOP, processing the noting & compiling the information sought in above paras.
2. The flow of information should not be incorrectly withheld by taking refuge under the exemption clause contained in Section 8 (1) (d) (e), (g),
(h), (j) & 11 of the Act. The CPIO has to act consciously & avoid obstructing with a mala fide intention. Any information which could be produced in the court of law as evidence under Sec 74 of Indian Evidence Act 1872 cannot be withheld under the Sec 8 (1) (d), (e), (g), (h) & (j) and
11. Being the custodian of the information, it is mandatory on your part to decide judicious supply.
3. Plz inform the name, designation and office address of the officers, whose assistance was sought by CPIO in connection with taking decision and supplying information desired under section-5(4) read with 5(5) of Act & also furnish an affidavit declaring the veracity & authenticity of the information supplied to me. Evasion of reply within the stipulated period attracts the provision of Sec 166A of IPC 1860."
The CPIO furnished a reply to the complainant on 08.11.2021 stating as under:
"Please refer to your above 05 RTI applications seeking information under RTI Act, 2005. The reply of CPIO Sainik School Society on the above RTI applications is as under.
In terms of DOPT OM No.11/2/2008-IR dated 10.07.2008 it has been explained that according to section 2(f) of the RTI Act 2005 information means "any material in any form. A Citizen under the Act has a right to get material from a public authority which is held by or under the control of that public authority, the Plo is required to-supply such material to who seeks it. The Act however does not require the public information officer to deduce some conclusion from the material and supply the conclusion so deduced to the applicant. The PIO is not require to research on behalf of the applicant to deduce anything from the material and then supply it to him.Page 41 of 50
From the above RTI applications of Shri Jayant Kumar Singh it is observed that the lusions/reasons and are information sought by the applicant mainly concerns suggestions/conclusions/reaso of the nature of which have already been raised by the applicant in his earlier RTI applications. It is pertinent to mention here that during the year 1st January 2021 to 31st October 2021 around 50 RTI applications have been answered. It is also observed that the applicant has been making a number of RTI applications to CPIO Sainik School Society and also to other Public Authorities since 2012 consequent upon his removal from service by Sainik School Ambikapur. Such kind of information sought in the above RTI applications which require collection and collation of information will disproportionately divert the resources of Public Authority attracting provisions of Section 7(9) of the RTI Act 2005.
In this regard CIC decision in File No. CIC/MPERS/A/2018/141407 dated 06.01.2020 in Nutan Thakur v/s CPIO, Department of Personnel & Training and CIC decision in File No. CIC/DS/A/2013/001734-SA in Sh. Sudhir Kumar v/s Directorate of Education, East District, GNCTD, Delhi dated 22.08.2014 are also relevant wherein CIC has also commented on the abuse of RTI Act 2005 by the applicant by making repetitive, harassing and vengeful applications causing criminal wastage of time and resource of Public Authority should be discouraged.
The most relevant CIC decision dated 27.04.2020 in Jayant Kumar Singh(i.e., of the above applicant itself) v/s CPIO Sainik Schools and CPIO Sainik School Society, it has been observed that the menace caused by vexatious/frivolous litigants is well recognized and if similar obstruction is faced by quasl-judicial bodies particularly with respect to statutes like the RTI Act which is premised on bringing transparency and accountability for the larger good of the public it is only axiomatic that such misuse ought to be curbed.
With the above reply the above mentioned RTI applications of Shri Jayant Kumar Singh are hereby disposed."
Being dissatisfied, the complainant filed a First Appeal dated NIL. The FAA vide its order dated 27.01.2022, upheld the reply of CPIO.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, complainant approached the Commission with the instant Complaint.
17.CIC/MODEF/C/2023/637530 Page 42 of 50 Relevant facts emerging from complaint:
RTI application filed on : 06.12.2022 CPIO replied on : 19.01.2023 First appeal filed on : Not on record
First Appellate Authority's order : Not on record 2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 01.08.2023 Information sought:
The Complainant filed an RTI application dated 06.12.2022 (online) seeking the following information:
"1. Please provide the following information at the earliest from the opening of current session to till date abiding the Sec 7 (1) of RTI Act 2005:
(a) Number of cadets withdrawn on parent request.
(b) Number of cadets expelled on disciplinary grounds.
(c) Number of request for withdrawal of cadets is pending with school.
(d) Number of cadets failed in Class XI at the end of session this year.
(e) Number of cadets cracked UPSC NDA/NA written exam in last three years.
(f) Number of cadets selected in NDA/NA in last three years.
2. None of the above information is protected under any exception of the RTI Act 2005. In case of seeking refuge under any exception it is requested to justify and explain the reasons as mentioned at para 19 (5) of the RTI Act 2005."
The CPIO furnished a point-wise reply to the complainant on 29.12.2022 stating as under:
"(a)19
(b)NIL (c )NIL Page 43 of 50
(d)01
(e)49
(f) 09 +02 would be joining in Jan 23"
The CPIO furnished a point-wise reply to the complainant on 19.01.2023 stating as under:
"(a) Para 1 (a). The information sought by the applicant is required to be compiled and/or created. Under RTI Act, 2005 compilation/creation of information is not allowed.
(b) Para 1 (b) & (c). Nil
(c) Para 1(d). Information does not exist.
(d) Para 1 (e). 108 cadets.
(f) Para 1 (e). 16 cadets."
Being dissatisfied, the complainant failed to file a First Appeal. The FAA order is not on record.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, complainant approached the Commission with the instant Complaint.
18.CIC/MODEF/A/2023/642061 Relevant facts emerging from complaint:
RTI application filed on : 10.05.2023 CPIO replied on : Not on record First appeal filed on : 14.07.2023
First Appellate Authority's order : Not on record 2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 29.08.2023 Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 10.05.2023 (online) seeking the following information:Page 44 of 50
"1. Please refer to my complaint with reference No. MODEF/E/2023/0000668 and your reply vide letter No. SSAP/Est/Pers/JKS/1478 dated 22 Mar 2023.
2. The complaints addressed to all the redressal agencies were replied to by authorities in command at Sainik School Ambikapur. And all of them have been disposed of mechanically without giving due consideration to the facts in order to suppress the incompetence of predecessors.
3. In view of the above, the following certified documents/information may be forwarded at the earliest keeping the evidence provided/cited and examined by your good self so as to substantiate your charge of abusing the grievances redressal mechanism.
(a) Appointment letters of TGT (Comp Science) and Nursing Assistant reflecting their temporary appointment for 179 days on 11 August 2008 and qualifications evidence.
(b) Board Proceedings regularizing their services as Regular Employees without opening a recruitment process on 01 Jan 2009.
(c) LBA Chairman approved Board Proceedings of appointments mentioned above.
(d) Appointment letters and inter-school transfer authority of TGT (Eng) and TGT (Eng) turned TGT (Gen Science) promoted as PGT (Eng) and PGT (Biology) in 2013.
(e) Documents/Statements negating the direct acquaintances of PGT (physics) and Lab Asst appointed in 2013 and TGT (Gen Science) in 2012 with appointing authority.
(f) Letter demanding and supplying experience certificate by M/s Nalanda Trading Agency along with the postal receipts for the award of Cadets Mess tender.
(g) Five pages SOC sent to LBA Chairman subscribed by Gp Capt Tarun Khare on 13 Jun 2015.
(h) Complete details of all the firms that participated in Cadets Mess tender reflecting their Firm, VAT, FSSAI, EPF & ESIC Registration along with solvency.Page 45 of 50
(i) Negating the statement that the School Cadet Mess since the beginning of the school was on contract with the same contractor at para 1 & 8 of SOC and a number of allegations at para 3 of SOC.
(j) Negating allegations leveled by TGT (Comp Sci) on Capt Gorantla Rambabu demanding a bribe of Rs. Five Lakh for confirmation by the undersigned.
(k) Shreds of evidence of blackmailing and threat of using media against TGT (Comp Science).
(l) Evidence of the news published of fraudulent appointment being paid news."
Having not received any response from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 14.07.2023. The FAA order is not on record.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Complainant/Appellant: Absent.
Respondent: Dr. P. Sreenivas, CPIO and Shri Niranjan Das, Officer Superintendent, attended the hearing through VC.
The Appellant/Complainant did not participate in the hearing despite service of the hearing notice. A request has been received from the Appellant/Complainant through email dated 12.12.2024, wherein he has requested the bench to decide his cases on merits. The relevant extract of the email is as under:
"I am writing to inform you that I am unable to attend the scheduled hearing for my complaints with the Central Information Commission on 13 December 2024 due to a mandatory medical review on the same day.
While I regret my inability to participate in the hearing, I respectfully request the Hon'ble Information Commissioner to kindly consider the merits of the complaints impartially and ensure that a fair decision is passed based on the facts and evidence submitted.Page 46 of 50
I have full faith in the Commission's ability to uphold the principles of transparency, accountability, and justice. Should there be a need for further clarification, I am willing to provide additional details at a later date or through written submissions."
The Respondent submitted that the Appellant/Complainant in his RTI Applications had sought multiple queries, and the information sought is voluminous in nature. He added that providing such voluminous information would disproportionately divert the resources of Public Authority as defined in Section 7 (9) of RTI Act and accordingly their office has provided an opportunity of inspection of the relevant records to Appellant/Complainant, but he did not avail the same. While explaining the brief background of the cases, he apprised the bench of the fact that the Appellant/Complainant is a disgruntled employee and is using the RTI mechanism to harass their office. He added that the Appellant/Complainant was appointed as an Office Superintendent in the year 2013. He further added that several complaints regarding his undisciplined behaviour with the fellow staff were received and each complaint was properly inquired into. Despite issuing several warnings, the Appellant/Complainant showed no sign of improvement and accordingly his probation period was terminated in the year 2014. He apprised the bench of the fact that total of 92 such cases of the Appellant/Complainant had already been decided till date by several benches of the Hon'ble Commission since the year 2016 with a word of caution to Appellant/Complainant to make judicious use of his right to information. Despite this, the Appellant/Complainant continues to exploit the RTI mechanism for personal vendettas and harassment, disregarding the Commission's earlier warnings.
In Second Appeal No. CIC/MODEF/A/2023/642061, the Respondent submitted that the averred RTI Application was not received in their office as per the available records and that is why no reply could be given to Appellant/Complainant. He further volunteered to provide an opportunity of inspection of the relevant records to Appellant/Complainant since the information sought is voluminous in nature and providing such voluminous information would disproportionately divert the resources of Public Authority as defined in Section 7 (9) of RTI Act.
A common written submission has been received from Dr. P. Sreenivas, CPIO, vide letter dated 11.12.2024, wherein the Commission has been apprised as under:Page 47 of 50
"Following is submitted by CPIO for your information please:-
(a) Time bound reply was forwarded to the applicant by the CPIO of the school.
(b) The information sought by the appellant pertains to a period of seven years and is voluminous in nature. The school with limited resources and manpower is committed towards smooth functioning of the school.
(c) Hence, the applicant was given an opportunity to visit the school office to peruse the records/documents."
Decision The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case and perusal of the records, observes that the Appellant/Complainant in his RTI Applications had sought multiple queries, and the information sought is voluminous in nature. As per the provisions of Section 7 (9) of RTI Act, directing the Respondent to provide such voluminous records would disproportionately divert the resources of Public Authority. Accordingly, the replies given by the Respondent is adequate and the Commission upholds the same.
Be that as it may, the Commission further observes from the perusal of records that 92 Second Appeals/ Complaint cases of the Appellant/Complainant against the same Public Authorities had already been heard and disposed of by different benches of the Commission. It is also worth noting that a total number of 18 Appeal/Complaint cases are listed for today's hearing and all these RTI Applications and Appeals/Complaints are based on his myriad grievances emanating from his termination from service. It was also opined that by way of filling these many RTI Applications seeking all and sundry information, the Appellant/Complainant is causing harassment to the public authority as well as wasting the time and resources of the Commission. Having adjudicated upon the number of such cases till date as well as from the nature of queries in the instant cases, the Commission observes that Appellant/Complaint projects a rather unhealthy approach in inundating the Sainik Schools, particularly, Sainik School, Ambikapur with so many RTI Applications, ostensibly to pressurize the public authority into settling his grievances emanating from termination of his service. This intention of the Appellant/Complainant militates against the spirit of the RTI Act whose primary objective is providing information to the citizens. It appears that the Appellant/Complainant has grossly misconceived the idea of exercising his Page 48 of 50 Right to Information as being absolute and unconditional. The approach of the Appellant/Complainant is against the spirit of the RTI Act and clogging the valuable time and resources of the Public Authorities. The Respondent has pleaded for remedy against repeated and humongous number of RTI applications and Appeals by the same person. In this regard, the Commission invites attention of the parties towards a judgement of the Hon'ble High Court of Kolkata in a case titled Biplab Kumar Chowdhury v. The State of West Bengal & Ors. WPA 3116 of 2022 wherein it was held as under and leave it to the respondent to choose a remedy.
"...It appears from the documents annexed to the writ petition that the petitioner's ploy is to collect information under the Right to Information Act and thereafter use the said information to harass the private parties as well as the Municipality for unlawful gain. The conduct of the petitioner appears to be plainly harrassive and mala fide.
The averments and allegations made in the writ petition remains unsubstantiated. The writ petition is an abuse of the process of law and liable to be dismissed with costs.
The writ petition is accordingly dismissed with costs of Rs. 25,000/-(twenty-five thousand) only to be paid by the petitioner in the office of the West Bengal State Legal Services Authority within September 30, 2022."
In view of the above-said observations, the Commission advises the Appellant/Complainant to make judicious and sensible use of his Right to Information Act in future instead of making it a tool to create undue pressure on the Public Authority.
The Appeals and Complaints are dismissed 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 Page 49 of 50 Copy To:
THE FAA, Sainik School Ambikapur, Vill - Mendra Kalan, Dist - Surguja, Chhattisgarh - 497001 Page 50 of 50 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)