Central Information Commission
File No.CIC/SM/A/2009/000838 dated 30-09-2008
Right to Information Act-2005-Under Section (19)
Dated: 8 April 2010
Name of the Appellant : Shri C.P. Morjal
Flat No. C-1, Patliputra C,
Anushakti Nagar,
Mumbai.
Name of the Public Authority : CPIO, Department of Atomic Energy,
Anushakti Bhawan,
Chtrapati Shivaji Marg,
Mumbai - 400 001.
The Appellant was present in person.
On behalf of the Respondent, Shri A.P. Joshi, Additional Secretary
was present.
2. In this case, the Appellant had, in his application dated 30 September
2008, requested the CPIO to explain the reasons for not giving him the
promotional benefit even though he was not allowed by the competent
authority to take charge of his new post due to certain administrative
exigencies. In his reply dated 3 November 2008, the CPIO attempted to offer
some information/clarification against all his queries. Since he was not
satisfied with the reply of the CPIO, he preferred an appeal on 1 December
2008. The Appellate Authority dismissed his appeal in his order dated 2
January 2009. It is against this order that the Appellant has come to the CIC
in second appeal.
3. We heard this case through videoconferencing. Both the parties were
present in the Mumbai studio of the NIC. We heard their submissions. The
Respondent argued that the Appellant had not asked for any specific
information but had sought clarifications/opinions from the CPIO by only
raising queries. He submitted that the Appellant was not entitled to receive
any information. On the other hand, the Appellant submitted that he should
CIC/SM/A/2009/000838
be provided with the reasons based on which the authorities did not permit
him to take over his new assignment on promotion even after transfer
orders had been issued and he had been relieved from his place for posting.
After hearing both the sides and after noting that the Appellant had not
indeed specified any particular information but had only raised several
queries, we think that the ends of justice would be met if he is provided
with the photocopy of the relevant file of the Department in which his
promotion and transfer had been processed and dealt with.
4. We, therefore, direct the CPIO to provide to the Appellant within 10
working days from the receipt of this order the photocopy of the relevant
file dealing with his promotion and transfer to Mumbai.
5. With the above direction, the appeal is disposed off.
6. Copies of this order be given free of cost to the parties.
(Satyananda Mishra)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied
against application and payment of the charges prescribed under the Act to the
CPIO of this Commission.
(Vijay Bhalla)
Assistant Registrar
CIC/SM/A/2009/000838