CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2009/002924/6236
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2009/002924
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Md. Taberaz Alam
C/o Mr Ram Manorath Verma (Sethi),
49, Meharchand Market, Lodhi Colony
New Delhi -110003.
Respondent : Mr. Dal Chand
Public Information Officer & Dy. Director (Health)
New Delhi Municipal Corporation,
Palika Kendra, Health Establishment,
Unit-II,
New Delhi- 110001.
RTI application filed on : 01/08/2009 PIO replied : 06/10/2009 First appeal filed on : 08/09/2009 First Appellate Authority order : No order. Second Appeal received on : 17/11/2009 Date of Notice of Hearing : 30/11/2009 Hearing Held on : 0/01/2010 S. No Information Sought Reply of the PIO 1. Minimum qualification for appointment to the post Enclosed.
of ward boy, aya, lab attendant in the hospitals of
NDMC.
2. The list of ward boys, ayas and lab attendants The list could be provided after the payment of
working in the hospitals of NDMC along with the Rs 2 per copy. The Appellant could also inspect
date of their appointments and their qualification. the files.
3. Whether the appointment is on the same line as that Comparison is not available.
of Directorate of Health Service, Delhi Govt.
4. Details of appointment of the above mentioned The Appellant had not mentioned the particular
employees along with the date when the period of details he required about the
advertisement was published in the newspaper and appointment of Ward Boy, Aya and Lab
the date when they were called up by the Directorate attendant. Therefore, the information could not
of Employment Exchange, Delhi. be provided.
5. Action taken on the letter signed by Mr PM Sayed No record of any such letter without number
and Mr Salman Khursheed dated 31/05/1995 and and address was available at the office (14 years
18/05/1995 regarding the appointment of Mohd. have lapsed).
Tabrez Alam as peon in Deptt. of Health, child
Welfare Center, Babar Road, New Delhi.
6. The copy of application for the post of Lab The Appellant did not fulfill the job
Attendant and the reasons for rejection including the requirements as per RRs.
remarks of the Chairman of NDMC.
7. Certified copies of the Appellant’s application dated ‘The copy of application dated 11/01/2007 with
11/01/2007 sent to PIO NDMC Health Deptt. reply thereof can be obtained on payment of the
Charak Palika Hospital, Moti Bagh and the reply usual fee directly from PIO NDMC Health
thereof under RTI. Deptt. Charak Palika Hospital Moti Bagh.’
8. Allocation of budget in Material and Supply, The questions were not specific and therefore
instrument equipment and office expenses between information could not be provided.
the period 01/01/2009 till date.
9. Copy of orders issued to various firms for supply of Same as above.
goods material and supply and whether all the
formalities have be completed or not. (01/01/2009
till date).
10. Good received during the period 01/01/2009 till date Same as above.
in material and supply, instrument equipment and
office expenses.
11. Status of payments made to the firms and the Same as above.
amount due to be made by 31/03/2009.
12. Whether orders for supply of goods had been issued Same as above.
in the absence of budget. Whether they have been
adhered to in the current financial year.
First Appeal:
Unsatisfactory information provided by the PIO.
Order of the FAA:
No order passed by FAA.
Ground of the Second Appeal:
Unsatisfactory information provided by the PIO and no order passed by FAA. The FAA did not even call
the Appellant for the hearing.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Appellant : Md. Taberaz Alam;
Respondent : Mr. Dal Chand, Public Information Officer & Dy. Director (Health);
The respondent has stated that he does not have the copy of the application of 1995. The
Respondent has provided a photocopy of the letter of 21/03/2007 in which Dy. Director(health) has
stated, “The request of your plan for the post of lab attendant was declined by the then Chairman
NDMC(Mr. Imtiaz Khan) on the grounds Lab Attendants have to perform technical function preambaly
and earlier matriculation qualification would not be sufficient.” The Appellant says that this statement
would have been made on basis on records. The Respondent is directed to provide the basis on which this
statement was made. The PIO is also directed to give a photocopy of the application of 11/01/2007
alongwith the reply as per query-7.
Decision:
The Appeal is allowed.
The PIO is directed to provide the information as mentioned above before 15 January 2010.
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
01 January 2010
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(RR)