Central Information Commission
Mr. Satpal Singh vs Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited on 23 August, 2013
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26101592
File No. CIC/BS/A/2012/000365/3300
23 August 2013
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Satpal Singh
Retired SSS BSNL
40/2 Dharampura Colony,
Batala-143505, District: Gurdaspur(PB)
Respondent : CPIO & Addl. GM(CFA)
BSNL
O/o the Sr. General Manager Telecom
District Pathankot, Punjab
RTI application filed on : 21/07/2011
PIO replied on : 18/08/2011
First appeal filed on : 19/09/2011
First Appellate Authority order : 19/10/2011
Second Appeal received on : 27/01/2012
Information sought:
1- Photocopy of decision of the Chargesheet issued to Sh. Karamjit Singh, STS Eatala under rules 14 of the CCS (CCA) Rules 1965 during the year 2004. 2- Photocopies of the statement of witnesses recorded by the then inquiry officer in the above cited case & his finding report.
3- Copy of office order against which Sh. K. S. Gill STS Batala was posted in Batala as Telephone Revenue Inspector and date of posting as TRI Batala. 4- Month wise total recovery of defaulter amounts made during his tenure as TRI Batala and month wise amounts received in the shape of TA bills of Sh. K. S. Gill from Jan 2010 to March 2011 with copy of TA Bills.
5- Copy of attendance report/attendance register maintained by the concerned official inspect of Sh. K. S. Gill TRI Batala with effect from 01/01/2010 to 31/03/2011. 6- Copy of special leave/casual leave availed by the said official up to 31/03/2011.
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
The PIO has refused the information under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present Appellant: Mr. Satpal Singh through VC Respondent: Mr. Sanjay Gupta CPIO's representative through VC The CPIO's representative stated that the appellant in his RTI application dated 21/07/2011 had asked for various information related to third party and the then CPIO had denied the same Page 1 of 2 claiming exemption under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. The appellant argued that certain information requested by him like TA Bills, leave records, etc. cannot be denied as these are in public domain. The CPIO's representative contended that the charge sheet and other documents connected with the disciplinary proceedings initiated against other employee are personal information related to those officers and as the appellant has not cited any bona fide larger public purpose to justify their disclosure the information is exempt under 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. He, however, agreed to furnish the information requested in queries 3 to 6 of the appellant's RTI application.
Decision notice:
As agreed by the CPIO's representative he should provide the information requested by the appellant in queries 3 to 6 of his RTI application dated 21/07/2011 within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order. As regards the information sought under query 1 & 2 the CPIO's representative's submissions are in order. The information need not be disclosed.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
BASANT SETH Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy:
(A.K.Jha) Deputy Secretary and Deputy Registrar Page 2 of 2