Central Information Commission
Govardhan G Bhasme vs Ministry Of Civil Aviation on 9 October, 2018
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग
, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द
ली, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं या / Second Appeal No. CIC/MOCAV/A/2017/149107
Govardhan G Bhasme
....अपीलकता
/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO/Under Secretary, M/o Civil Aviation. Rajiv
Gandhi Bhawan, Safdarjung, Airport, New Delhi - 110057.
&
ED(CA)/ Central nodal Officer, Air India Limited,
Airlines House, 113 Gurudwara Rakbganj Road,
New Delhi - 110001. ... ितवादीगण /Respondents
Dates
RTI application : 08.02.2017
CPIO reply : 14.02.2017
First Appeal : 09.03.2017
FAA Order : not on record
Second Appeal : 01.07.2017
Date of hearing : 12.09.2018, 28.09.2018
Facts:
The appellant vide RTI application dated 08.02.2017 sought information on two points as under:
A(1). Details about incorporation of Air India Engineering Services Ltd(AIESL).
1a. Shareholding of GOI, AI and others.
2. The powers and functions of Board of Directors (BOD).
3. Service rules as framed by the BOD of the Air India Ltd under approval from DoPT, GOI.
4. Other related information.
Page 1 of 5The CPIO's reply and the First Appellate Authority (FAA)'s order are not on record. Aggrieved with the non-supply of the desired information from the respondent authority, the appellant filed second appeal under the provision of Section 19 of the RTI Act before the Central Information Commission on 01.07.2017.
Grounds for Second Appeal The CPIO did not provide the desired information.
Order
Appellant : Absent
Respondent : Shri Chandra Kishore Shukla,
Under Secretary cum CPIO along with others,
Air India Limited
During the hearing, the respondent CPIO submitted that they had received the RTI application dated 08.02.2017 on 13.02.2017 and transferred the same on 14.02.2017 u/s 6(3) of the RTI Act.
The appellant was not present to plead for this case. On perusal of the case records, it was noted by the Commission that no reply has been provided to the appellant till date. A comprehensive reply should have been provided to the appellant as all the sought for information is eminently disclosable under the relevant provisions of the RTI Act in the form of certified true copies of the documents sought e.g. note sheets, letters, correspondences, e- mails etc. In view of the above, a Show Cause notice is issued to the then CPIO Smt Aruna Gopal Krishnan, Air India Limited u/s 20 of the RTI Act to explain the following:-
Why no reply was provided to the appellant in all these years in respect of the RTI application dated 08.02.2017.Page 2 of 5
The explanation to the above stated Show Cause notice is to be submitted to the Commission by the respondent CPIO/PIO within 15 days of the receipt of this order. The present CPIO is also to submit a report to the Commission indicating the present address, mobile no., place of posting and designation of the CPIO working at the relevant post at the relevant period. The present respondent CPIO is to serve a copy of this order to the then respondent CPIO under intimation to the Commission. On receipt of the explanation to the said Show Cause notice, further action as deemed appropriate will be taken.
The respondent CPIO should note that in the event of non-submission of the explanation within the time stipulated above, the Commission has the liberty to take the required decision ex-parte against the respondent CPIO.
Be that as it may, since no desired information was provided to the appellant in the present case, the present respondent CPIO, Shri Ashwini Sehgal is directed to provide point wise reply complete in all respects to the appellant as available on record in the form of certified true copies of the documents sought e.g. note sheets, letters, correspondences, e-mails etc.(legible copies), free of charge u/s 7(6) of the RTI Act within 15 days of the receipt of the order. For this purpose, the concerned CPIO/PIO, can take assistance of any other office/department u/s 5(4) of the RTI Act.
The respondent CPIO is further directed to send a report containing the copy of the revised reply and the date of despatch of the same to the RTI appellant within 07 days thereafter to the Commission for record.
The registry of this bench is directed to send a notice to Shri Aruna Gopal Krishnan, Central Nodal Officer, ED(CA)Air India Limited, Airlines House 113, Gurudwara Rakabganj Road, New Delhi and to ensure that the respondent CPIO is present invariably on 28.09.2018 at 02.00 p.m. during the hearing.
With the above show cause/direction, the appeal is disposed of. Copies of the order be sent to the concerned parties free of cost.Page 3 of 5
Final Order : 28.09.2018
Respondent : Ram Kripal, GM (E-SS), AIESL
P.Chandra (Representative of CPIO)
A strict warning is issued to Smt Aruna GopalKrishnan, Central nodal officer, ED(CA), Air India Limited for not being present at the hearing on the appointed date and sending her subordinate to represent her in a showcause hearing. The Commission considers this action of Smt Aruna GopalKrishnan, Executive Director (CA), Air India as violation of the order of the CIC.
A written explanation was submitted by her vide letter dated 25.09.2018 in connection with the above stated show cause notice in which Smt Aruna GopalKrishnan, ED(CA), AI stated that the RTI dated 08.02.2017 of Govardhan G Bhasme was received from the Ministry of Civil Aviation (MoCA) on 16th Feb 2017 and the same was forwarded to the concerned CPIO in the Air India Engineering Services Limited (AIESL) (wholly owned subsidiary of Air India) u/s 6(3) of the RTI Act on 17.02.2017. Thereafter their office received an appeal dated 25.07.2017 received on 28.07.2017 and same was also forwarded to the First Appellate Authority (FAA) of the AIESL on 28.07.2017.
In view of the above explanation, it was noted that the said RTI application was forwarded within 3 days of its receipt by the ED(CA) & Central nodal officer for RTI in the Air India, hqrs to the concerned CPIO holding the requisite information in accordance with the provision of Sec- 6(3) of the RTI Act.
On perusal of the e-mail dated 17.02.2017 it was noted by the Commission that Shri S.K Bajaj, the then AGM (O.A) on behalf of the Central nodal officer & ED (CA) transferred the said RTI application through e-mail to Shri Rajesh Kohli of AIESL. However it was not a transfer u/s 6(3) of the RTI Act but was merely an administrative transfer.
In view of the above strict warnings are issued to both Sh, S.K Bajaj, the then AGM and Smt Aruna Gopala Krishnan, the then and present ED(CA), hqrs, Page 4 of 5 Air India to be more careful in future while transferring RTI applications i.e RTI applications are required to be transferred in accordance with the provision of the Sec 6(3) of the RTI Act and not merely in an administrative manner.
Shri Ram Kripal submitted that Shri Rajesh Kohli of the AIESL who is responsible for the consequent delay retired on July 2017. The Commission expresses displeasure over the negligent manner in which the concerned PIO of the AIESL i.e. Sh. S K Bajaj dealt with the said RTI application. The CMD, Air India is issued an advisory u/s 25(5) of the RTI Act to streamline his RTI management system at the hqrs and at the regional hqrs to ensure that such types of deficiencies are not repeated in future.
With the above direction, the showcause proceeding is closed. Copies of the order be sent to the concerned parties free of cost.
Amitava Bhattacharyya (अ मताभ भ टाचाय)
Information Commissioner ( सूचना आयु त )
Authenticated true copy
(अ भ मा णत स या पत त)
Ajay Kumar Talapatra (अजय कु मार तलपा )
Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक)
011- 26182594 / [email protected]
दनांक / Date
Page 5 of 5