CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2010/002869/10882
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/002869
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Ms. Nahida,
R/o 2788, Mohalla Niyariyan,
S.N. Marg, Ajmeri Gate,
Deihi-06
Respondent : Mr. S. C. Kaushik
Public Information Officer & Coordinator,
Education Department,
New Delhi Municipal Council,
Room no. 1005, l0th floor
Palika Kendra, New Delhi.
RTI application filed on : 22/07/2010 PIO replied : 04/08/2010 First appeal filed on : 13/08/2010 First Appellate Authority order : 03/09/2010 Second Appeal received on : 18/11/2010
The appellant sought information regarding
Sr. Information Sought Reply of PIO
1. Provide with the copy of B. Ed Certificate and Mark-sheet of all Copy Enclosed.
four candidates selected for the post of TGT (Urdu) on contract
basis on basis of exam and interview conducted by NDMC in 2009
who were eligible for the post of TEST (Urdu) in NDMC.
2. provide with the name and post of the official by the order of whom Not True.
the order has been issued giving appellant a post of in TGT (Urdu)
while no post is TGT(Urdu) is lying vacant in NDMC. Also provide
with the copies of the noting of same file.
3. Specify the information for what reason the same letter under the Same as above.
subject “offer for the post of TGT(Urdu) on contract basis” was
issued to appellant even if there is no post of TGT (Urdu) was no
lying vacant in NDMC.
4. Specify whether the same letter is an offer of appointment to Question No.4, do not arise in view of
appellant for the post of TGT (Urdu) on contract basis. reply of question 2 & 3.
5. Mention, if it appointment then the reason for not posting appellant Question 5 do not arise.
in the school even after 6 months of appointment.
6. Provide with the diary No of the appointment letter on the basis of R-202/Dir.(Edn.) dated 22/1/10
the offer (offer of post of TGT (Urdu) given to appellant.
7. Specify the name and post of the official to whom it was marked U & PO
and (he date on which the same is given to the dealing official.
8. Inform the date on which the dealing official put up appellant’s Since no posting order was issued hence
joining report to the authority. the joining report was not put up.
9. Specify any action taken by the authority in reference to appellant’s No action in absence of posting order.
Page 1 of 3
joining.
10. Provide the copies of noting of the same file in which appellant’s Enclosed.
appointment letter was put up.
11. Provide with the diary No. of the letter when the appellant made a Diary No, R-202/Dir./Edn.
representation to Director of Education.
12. Mention the name and the post of the dealing official to whom it Marked to U&PO with no direction.
was marked to put up in the file and date on which the letter was
given to Dealing officer.
13. Provide with the date on which the same letter was put up to the In view of Question No. 12 NA.
authority. Also provide with the copy of noting of the concerned
file in which appellant’s representation was put up to the dealing
official.
14. Inform about the action being taken by the competent authority in
No Action has been taken by the
reference to appellant’s representation. Competent Authority because the,
representation is not according to as per
offer order.
15. Inform under which rule Mr. Abdul Waseem was offered the post Mr. Abdul Waseem was appointed as
of TGT (Urdu). TGT(Urdu) on contract basis with the
approval of the Competent Authority.
16. Specify by whose order, he was offered the post when his name was As Above.
not included in the candidate list.
17. Provide with the name and post of official who proposed the name On having been receipt of the application,
of Mr. Abdul Waseem to the post in contract basis. the name of Mr. Abdul Waseem was
suggested for contact appointment by the
U&PO along with others.
18. Provide with the noting of the concerned file in which Mt Abdul Copy Enclosed.
Waseem was offered and appointed to the post on contract basis.
First Appeal:
Insufficient and unsatisfactory information provided by PIO.
Order of the FAA:
FAA ordered, “PlO is therefore directed to supply the correct information of question No.2 to 18 to the
appellant by post on 8th of Sep. 2010 as desired y the appellant.”
Ground of the Second Appeal:
Unsatisfactory information given by PIO.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Appellant : Ms. Nahida;
Respondent : Mr. S. C. Kaushik, Public Information Officer & Coordinator;
The Respondent has provided the information after the order of the FAA but the following
deficiencies have been noted:
1- Query-02: The name and post of the official who issued the order shall be provided.
2- Query-07: Name of the official and the date on which the letter was given to the dealing
official has to be provided.
3- Query-09: Copy of the letter marked to the officer with the notings will be provided.
4- Query-10: A copy of the joining letter of the Appellant with any notings on the file will be
provided.
5- Query-12: Name of the official and date on which the applicant’s representation was given to
the dealing officials will be provided.
Page 2 of 3
The Appellant wishes to inspect the all the relevant files. The PIO will facilitate an inspection of the
relevant files by the Appellant.
Decision:
The Appeal is allowed.
The PIO is directed to give the information on -points directed above to the
Appellant before 30 January 2011. If any of the information is not available this should be
stated.
The PIO will give attested photocopies of records which the appellant wants free of cost
upto 50 pages.
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
11 January 2011
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (PBR)
Page 3 of 3