CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2010/003194/10675
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/003194
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Mr. Mayank Gilani
B40, First floor, Moti Nagar,
New Delhi-110015
Respondent : Mrs. Satnam Dhamija
PIO & Dy. Director (GIC)
Department of Women and Child Development
1, Canning Lane, K G Marg,
New Delhi-1
RTI application filed on : 22/09/2010
PIO replied : 08/10/2010
First appeal filed on : 11/10/2010
First Appellate Authority order : 10/11/2010
Second Appeal received on : 16/11/2010
Information Sought:
As per remarks given on the above mentioned letter by PS to Secretary, Social Welfare & WCD,
Government of NCT of Delhi, the action taken report was to be obtained by Director, WCD from the AG
(Audit) Delhi. Whether the action taken report was obtained? If so, supply the copy of the action taken
report received from the AG (Audit) Delhi. (Point no.2)
Reply of the PIO:
Photocopies were enclosed.
Grounds for the First Appeal:
Incomplete and non-satisfactory reply from the PIO.
Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
Information has already been provided by the PIO.
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
Unsatisfactory response from PIO and FAA.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant: Mr. Mayank Gilani;
Respondent: Mrs. Satnam Dhamija, PIO & Dy. Director (GIC); Ms. Sumita Moza, Project Officer;
The Appellant has received satisfactory information with respect to query-01 but the PIO has given
photocopies of certain letters but has not specifically answered the query “Whether the action taken report
was obtained”. The PIO states that Dy. Director (GRC) has sent a letter on 20/01/2009 to the Accountant
General, Central Revenue(Audit) Delhi Region, Government of India in which it was stated “your kind
reference is invited to this officer letter no. F.NO.23/DWCD/GRC-SSS/08-09/31968-70 dated 29/12/2008 in
the matter of the alleged unbecoming conduct of audit party deputed for conducting the audit of GRC’s
working under Delhi Government. I am directed to request you to please intimate the action taken against
the members of he said audit party, to Director(WCD), 1, Canning Lane, K.G. Marg, New Delhi – 110001.”
The PIO states that in reply to this the only response to this has been a letter dated 03/02/2009 in which
Senior Audit Officer (OAD-HQ) has stated that an audit party would visit the office of WCD on 09/02/2009
for auditing the records of GRC Project. She states that no other communication has been received from the
office of the Accountant General (Audit) indicating that any action has been taken against the members of
the audit party against whom unbecoming conduct has been alleged.
It is distressing that the Audit Organization does not inform WCD whether any action has been taken
against members against whom “Unbecoming conduct has been alleged”. This probably means that no
action has been taken.
Decision:
The Appeal is disposed.
The information has been provided.
This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
Any information in compliance with this Order will be provided free of cost as per Section 7(6) of RTI Act.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
28 December 2010
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (PBR)