CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Room No. 415, 4th Floor, Block IV,
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi -110 066.
Tel: + 91 11 26161796
Decision No. CIC /OK/A/2008/01027//SG/0654
Appeal No. CIC/OK/A/2008/01027/
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Shri Abhinav Jha,
C/o Shri Prabhakar Jha,
(Hostel Warden) Kendriya Vidyalaya
Jhajjar, Haryana – 124104.
Respondent 1 : Shri M. L. Sharma,
PIO,
Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan,
Regional Office Chandigarh,
S.C.O. No. 72-73,
Sector - 31-A, Chandigarh.
RTI filed on : 28/02/2008
PIO replied : 29/03/2008
First appeal filed on : 28/04/2008
First Appellate Authority order : not mentioned
Second Appeal filed on : 14/07/2008
Kindly inform regarding the medical bill for reimbursement dated- 16/10/2007
Detail of required information:-
S. No. Information Sought. The PIO replied.
1. Whether the Controlling Authority of K.V. Jhajjar is Not mentioned.
legally authorized to stop the reimbursement of the
Life-Saving Medical Expenses incurred on his
treatment, which is a follow – up of a continues
course of a prolonged treatment started prior to
joining K.V. Jhajjar.
2. When all the relevant papers have already been
annexed with the medical bill dated 16/10/2007,
under what provision, the same has not yet been
reimbursed and why a reasoned order has not been
passed as yet by the Controlling Authority.
3. If any additional document is required to be
submitted with the bill dated 16/10/2007, kindly
mention it and expressly specify whether asking for
that is within the administrative Jurisdiction of the
Controlling Authority.
The First Appellate Authority ordered:
“The grounds mentioned by the appellant in his aforesaid appeal are not justified and
reasoned. As already explained, the information as desired by the appellant vide his
application dated 28/02/2008 has already been supplied to him, twice, but he refused
to collect the same at his own accord. It does not obviously entitle him to claim any
relief under RTI Act, 2005. However, even now he is free to collect the desired
information from the Principal & APIO, Jhajjar, if he so desires. Meanwhile, the
appeal of the appellant is rejected being devoid of any merits.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Appellant : Absent
Respondent : Shri M. L. Sharma,
The respondent states that the information was sent to the appellant’s address on
29/3/2008 by peon and it was taken. Then it was sent by speedpost on 31/3/2008 by
EH 06185440 5 IN which was also refused by the appellant. Given this evidence, the
appeal is not sustainable.
Decision:
The appeal is dismissed.
This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
19th December, 2008
(For any further correspondence please mention the decision number given above,
for quick disposal.)