Central Information Commission Judgements

Dr. Shardanand Singh vs State Recourse Center, … on 19 March, 2009

Central Information Commission
Dr. Shardanand Singh vs State Recourse Center, … on 19 March, 2009
               CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                      Room No. 415, 4th Floor,
                    Block IV, Old JNU Campus,
                        New Delhi -110067
                       Tel: + 91 11 26161796

                                            Decision No. CIC /SG/A/2008/00251/2296
                                                   Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2008/00251

Relevant Facts

emerging from the Appeal:

Appellant : Dr. Shardanand Singh
Flat No.42, Kamla Apartment
Road No.10, Patel Nagar,
Patna -800023.

Respondent : Mrs. Nishat Fatma
Public Information Officer
State Recourse Center, ‘Deepyatan’
Ministry of HRD,
302, Maurya Tower,
Maurya Lok Complex,
Budh Marg, Patna -800001.


RTI application filed on             :      20/05/2008
PIO replied                          :      17/06/2008
First appeal filed on                :      26/06/2008
First Appellate Authority order      :      23/07/2008
Second Appeal filed on               :      -------------

Information Sought:

The appellant had sought information from State Recourse Center, ‘Deepyatan’,
Ministry of H.R.D. regarding details of action taken in respect of order no. 50-30/2004-
AE-6/14.03.05 and 50-57/2005-AE-6/06.05.08 issued by Ministry of Human Resource
Department.

PIO’s Reply:

The PIO in his reply furnished following documents:
1- Copy of the order F.no.50-30/2004AE-6 dated 14/03/2005.
2- (a) Order of working committee 09/11/2005

(b) Order of working committee 22/12/2006

(c) Order of working committee 06/07/2007

(d) Order of working committee 9/11/2005
3- Copy of letter Govt. of India F.no.50-57/2005-AE dated 6th May 2008.

The First Appellate Authority ordered:
The first appellate authority in his order states that the appellant had sought new
information on 6 points. Hence F.A.A directed appellant that in case you need some
new information you must communicated to PIO not to appellate authority and
requested the appellant to ask specific information from PIO.

Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present.

Appellant : Dr. Shardanand Singh
Respondent : Ms. Nishat Fatma PIO
The appellant contends that the following information should have been given to him:

1. Copy of the subcommittee report.

2. Complete minutes of 22 December 2006 of the Executive committee alongwith
the signatures.

3. The copy of the decision by the Executive Committee for formation of the
subcommittee.

Decision:

The appeal is allowed.

The PIO will give the information described above to the appellant before 30 March
2009.

This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.

Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
19th March 2009

(In any correspondence on this decision, mentioned the complete decision number.)