Central Information Commission
Mrrajesh Gouhari vs Central Vigilance Commission on 13 May, 2016
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
2nd Floor, August Kranti Bhawan,
Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi110066
Decision No. CIC/RM/A/2014/001475/SB
Dated 13.05.2016
Appellant : Shri Rajesh Gouhari,
A1/107,
Janak Puri,
New Delhi110058.
Respondent : The Central Public Information Officer,
Central Vigilance Commission, Satarkta Bhawan BlockA, GPO Complex, I.N.A., New Delhi110 023.
Date of Hearing : 13.05.2016
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:
RTI application filed on : 14.11.2013
CPIO's reply : 17.12.2013
First Appeal : 11.01.2014
FAA's Order : 07.02.2014
Second Appeal filed on : 01.03.2014
Order
CIC/RM/A/2014/001475/SB Page 1
1. Shri Rajesh Gouhari filed an application dated 14.11.2013 under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) seeking information on three points including (1) details of action taken by CVC on his complaint/representation dated 01.02.2013, (2) details of action taken by CVC with complete relevant file notings and correspondence with regard to reporting the matter of irregularities of Educational Consultants India Limited (EdCIL) in its Annual Report since CVC had instituted direct inquiry against CMD EdCIL on 03.06.2011.
2. The appellant filed a second appeal dated 01.03.2014 before the Commission on the ground that he is not satisfied with the information provided by the CPIO and that the First Appellate Authority did not supply the requisite information, rather, tried to justify the misleading reply of the CPIO which does not reveal information as sought in his RTI application The appellant requested the Commission to arrange for getting the requisite information to uphold the key objective of transparency.
Hearing:
3. The appellant Shri Rajesh Gouhari and the respondent Shri Ashoke Kumar, Director, CVC were present in person.
4. The appellant submitted that the CVC has not provided information regarding action taken with regard to reporting the matter of irregularities in EdCIL in its Annual Report.
5. The respondent submitted that there was no material information regarding irregularities of EdCIL reported for inclusion in the Annual Report, 2012. Hence, the appellant was informed accordingly.
Decision:
CIC/RM/A/2014/001475/SB Page 2
6. The Commission after hearing the submissions of both the parties and perusal of records finds no ground to interfere with the order of FAA dated 07.02.2014.
7. The appeal is disposed of. Copy of decision be given free of cost to the parties.
(Sudhir Bhargava) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy (V.K. Sharma) Designated Officer CIC/RM/A/2014/001475/SB Page 3