CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2010/001010/8017
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/001010
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. B.P.Shrivastava
313A, Pratap Bhawan,
Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg (Press Area),
New Delhi- 110002.
Respondent : Mr. Anil Kumar Gupta
Public Information Officer &
Administrative Officer
Municipal Corporation of Delhi
Central Establishment Department
Town Hall, Delhi-110006
RTI application filed on : 16/12/2009
PIO replied : 19/01/2010
First appeal filed on : 25/01/2010
First Appellate Authority Ordered on : 24/02/2010
Second Appeal received on : 21/04/2010
The Appellant wanted information in regard to promotion of JEs to AEs.
S.No. Information Sought Reply of the Public Information
Officer (PIO)
1. Certified list of JEs promoted to AEs during .Copies may be obtained after deposit of
the period from 1/04/08 till now and with Rs. 160 @ Rs.2/pg in MCD treasury.
R.D.A. report/vigilance report in respect of
those who were promoted and report of those
who were senior as JEs but not promoted to
AEs.
2. Names and designation of officers who Channel of the Officials/Officers who
prepared proposal for promotion from JEs to prepared proposal for promotion from
AEs at start and names and designations of JEs to AEs:
officers through which proposals were routed Dealing Assistant (RPA-II), Admn.
to the final approving authority. Officer (Estt.)-III, Asstt. Cm. (Estt.)-I,
Director (Personnel), Addl. Cm. (Engg&
Estt.), DPC/Screening Committee for
recommendations, Competent Authority
for Administrative approval. Names not
mentioned.
3. Inspection of related documents besides Inspection may be conducted within one
allowing to supply certified copies of related week of issue of the reply with prior
documents if required after inspection. appointment to the Admn. Officer (Estt.)-
III, Rm. No. 90, Town Hall.
Ground of First Appeal:
Unsatisfactory information received from the PIO.
First Appellate Authority (FAA) ordered:
PIO (CED) had been directed to make available to the appellant any information that had been
inadvertently left out within thirty working days. He may also be asked to inspect the relevant
records.
Ground of the Second Appeal:
Unsatisfactory information provided by the PIO.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant: Absent;
Respondent: Mr. Anil Kumar Gupta, Public Information Officer & Administrative Officer;
The PIO states that the appellant has not paid the additional fee of Rs.160/- and hence the
information had not been provided on query-1. The PIO’s reply had not been sent within 30 days
as required by the RTI Act hence the information should have been provided free of cost as per
the provisions of Section 7(6) of the RTI ACT. The PIO had also offered inspection of records
but the appellant has claimed that he was not able to fix the convenient time and date for the
inspection.
Decision:
The Appeal is allowed.
The PIO is directed to provide information on query-1 to the appellant free
of cost before 20 June 2010.
The PIO is also directed to facilitate an inspection of the relevant records by the
appellant on one of the following dates (convenient to the appellant):
- June 10, 2010 - June 11, 2010 - June 17, 2010 - June 18, 2010 From 03.00pm onwards.
The PIO will also give attested photocopies of any records that the appellant wants
during the inspection free of cost upto 100 pages.
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
04 June 2010
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(AG)