1
Central Information Commission
Room No.307, II Floor, B Wing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama
Place, New Delhi110066
Telefax:01126180532 & 01126107254 websitecic.gov.in
Adjunct to Appeal : No. CIC/DS/A/2011/000220
Appellant /Complainant : Sh. Vinod Kumar Sharma,
Chandigarh
Public Authority : Home Department(III),
Chandigarh
(Sh.Roop Ram, then Supdt.,
Ms.Prerna Puri,FAA, Sh.Amrit
,PA,k Sh.Dalip Singh
And Mandeep Yadav, Clerk)
Date of Hearing : 24 June 2011
Date of Decision : 24 June 2011
Facts
:
1. In pursuance of Commission’s order dated
12.5.2011, CPIO appeared before the Commission to
explain the circumstances which led to denial of
disclosure of information to the appellant under the
provisions of Section 8(1)(h), even though as per
the averments of the appellant, the disciplinary
proceedings had been completed, final orders passed
and penalty awarded to the appellant well before the
orders of the CPIO.
2. The First Appellate Authority has also some
written submissions in this matter and was also
present at the hearing today.
3. CPIO has stated that the appellant is a former
employee of Chandigarh Administration and during his
service, was issued various chargesheets in
departmental proceedings besides registration of
serious criminal cases against him (details of these
cases are provided in the written submission).
Therefore, keeping in view the background of the
appellant, who was involved in criminal intimidation
and launching of physical attack, the CPIO, in his
best judgement, invoke the provisions of Section 8(1)
(g) in denying the information to the appellant.
These facts were also in the knowledge of the First
Appellate Authority, who, therefore, upheld the
order of the CPIO after exercising her best judgement
in the given situation. It is noted that these facts
Adjunct to Appeal : No. CIC/DS/A/2011/000220
2
were not brought before the Commission at the hearing
held on 12.5.2011, which should have been done by the
CPIO who represented the Public Authority at the
hearing.
DECISION NOTICE
4. After hearing the arguments presented by the
CPIO and after perusing the written submissions of
the First Appellate Authority, the Commission is
satisfied with the explanation that in view of the
reputation and past behaviour of the appellant, which
is substantiated by providing details of the cases
registered against the appellant, the CPIO and the
First Appellate Authority had, in their best
judgement, taken the decision to deny the disclosure
of information under the provisions of Section 8(1)
(h) and 8(1)(g) of the Act. The Commission,
therefore, drops the proposed penalty proceedings
against the CPIO and also having considered afresh
the case in the light of the facts presented before
the Commission today, withdraws its recommendations
to the controlling authority to issue memo of
stricture to the First Appellate Authority for lapse
in discharging her duties as mandated under the RTI
Act. The respondent has confirmed that on the basis
of the Commission’s previous order, he has already
received the information requested by him. No
further action is required to be taken. The case is
closed.
(Smt. Deepak Sandhu)
Information Commissioner (DS)
Authenticated true copy:
(T. K. Mohapatra)
Under Secretary & Dy. Registrar
Copy to:
1. Shri Vinod KumarSharma
House No.2254, Sector19C,
Chandigarh
2. The CPIO
The Supdt. Home111,
Chandigarh Administration Sectt.
Sector19C, UT Chandigarh
Adjunct to Appeal : No. CIC/DS/A/2011/000220
3
3. The Appellate Authority
The Supdt. Home111,
Chandigarh Administration Sectt.
Sector19C, UT Chandigarh
4. Shri Bhupiner Singh
Joint Transport Commissioner
Govt. of Haryana, Chandigarh
5. The Commissioner Transport
Govt. of Haryana, Chandigarh
Adjunct to Appeal : No. CIC/DS/A/2011/000220