Central Information Commission
CIC/AD/A/2009/000753
Dated August 18, 2009
Name of the Applicant : Ms.Mala Devi
Name of the Public Authority : Dept. of Posts, Muzaffarpur
Background
1. The Applicant filed an RTI application dt.2.3.09 with the CPIO, DoP,
Muzaffarpur. She requested information about her husband including the
following: for i) job description of her husband; ii) whether he is being given
weekly day off; iii) whether as per letter dated 12.4.91 he is being treated as
casual labour and why he is not being paid for working on weekly day off.
On not receiving any information, she filed an appeal dt.11.4.09 with the
Appellate Authority. The Appellate Authority replied on 15.4.09 asking the
CPIO to provide the information. Meanwhile, the information from the CPIO
dated 15.4.09 was received by the Appellant. Not satisfied, The Applicant filed
a second appeal dt.18.5.09 before the CIC.
2. The Bench of Mrs. Annapurna Dixit, Information Commissioner, scheduled the
hearing for August 18, 2009.
3. Mr. Ali Imam Bismil, Supdt., RMS Division, Muzzafarpur cum CPIO
represented the Public Authority.
4. The Applicant’s husband represented the Appellant during the hearing.
Decision
5. The Respondent stated that the delay in providing the information was due to
the rush of work, March being the financial year closing month. He stated
that the Appellant’s husband, who was present at the hearing instead of the
Appellant, was engaged by the Superintendent. Railway Mail Service,
Muzaffarpur as a part time ‘Waterman’ on 6 hours a day duty. The
Respondent added that the Director General, Department of Posts, Delhi in
his letter dated 12.4.1991 stated that ‘temporary status’ would be conferred
on casual workers in employment as on 29.11.1989 who continued to be
currently employed and have rendered continuous service for at least one
year i.e. a period of 240 days and that such casual workers engaged for full
working hours i.e. 8 hours including half an hour lunch time will be paid at
daily rates on the basis of the minimum of the pay scale for a regular Group
‘D’ official. The Respondent shared with the Commission a clarification dated
16.7.1991 in which the Director General stated that the scheme is effective
from 29.11.1989 and hence the eligible casual workers may be conferred
temporary status and the benefits indicated in the circular with effect from
29.11.1989. In this connection, in another clarification shared by the
Respondent, the Secretary (Posts), New Delhi vide circular dated 16.8.1991
had stated that part time casual workers are not covered by the scheme and
that they may be brought on the strength of full time casual workers, subject
to availability of work and suitability. According to the Respondent the
Appellant’s husband being a part time casual worker is not entitled to any
benefits as mentioned above for casual workers .
6. The Appellant insisted that he too should be provided payment for the
weekly day off as applicable in the case of GDS. However, the Respondent
informed him that the GDS is a Government post and that the Grameen Dak
Sevaks are recruited on the basis of interviews and are entitled to all benefits
where as he is only a part time casual worker.
7. After hearing both sides, the Commission while holding that complete
information has been provided to the Appellant, suggests that the Appellant’s
case is considered sympathetically by the CPIO and rejects the appeal.
(Annapurna Dixit)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy:
(G. Subramanian)
Asst. Registrar
Cc:
1. Ms. Mala Devi
W/o Shri Mohan Kumar Tripathi
Vill. & Post – Saidhpur
Bhaya-Dighwar
Sharan 841 207
2. The CPIO
Department of Posts
O/o Supdt.
Rail Mail Service U Division
Muzaffarpur 842 001
3. The Appellate Authority
Department of Posts
O/o Post Master General
Northern Region
Muzaffarpur 842 002
4. Officer incharge, NIC
5. Press E Group, CIC