In the Central Information Commission
at
New Delhi
File No: CIC/SM/A/2011/000133AD
Date of Hearing : July 15, 2011
Date of Decision : July 15, 2011
Parties:
Appellant
Shri Harish Kumar Agrawal
Technical Officer Grade T5,
RRC, IGFRI, Village Bharmat, Post Banoori,
Palampur 176 061
The Appellant was not present.
Respondents
Department of Personnel & Training (DoPT)
North Block,
New Delhi
Represented by: Shri Virendra Singh, Under Secretary and Shri Rakesh Moza, Under Secretary.
Information Commissioner : Mrs. Annapurna Dixit
___________________________________________________________________
In the Central Information Commission
at
New Delhi
File No: CIC/SM/A/2011/000133AD
ORDER
Background
1. The Applicant filed his RTIapplication dated 11.10.2010 with the PIO, DoPT, New Delhi, seeking
certain clarification with respect to the position of Rules in respect of APAR and its grading system.
The PIO, on 28.10.2010, while informing the Applicant that his query at item no. 1 has been
forwarded to Dy. Secretary, (Estt. A) for response, also gave pointwise information to him with
respect to the balance items (i.e. 2 to 6) of queries. The Applicant, however, being aggrieved with the
reply of the PIO, filed his 1stappeal with the Appellate Authority on 21.11.2010. The Appellate
Authority, through his order dated 08.12.2010, endorsed the PIO’s reply and advised the Appellant to
take up the matter with the concerned Appellate Authority in respect of item no. 1 of his RTI
application. The Appellant, thereafter, filed the present petition before the Commission on 20.12.2010
alleging that the “the CPIO/FAA has knowingly given him incorrect, incomplete, misleading or
unrelated information on some points. ” He accordingly prayed that the correct information be
directed to be given to him.
Decision
2. The Respondents, during the hearing, stated that they have given the required information to the
Appellant, along with the relevant documents (such as, O.M dated 23.07.2009; extract of Brochure of
preparation & maintenance of APAR for Central Civil Services and guidelines etc.), with respect to his
queries at item nos. 2 to 6 of his RTIapplication and that with regard to query at item no. 1 they have
transferred the Appellant’s RTIapplication to the concerned PIO, who also, on 09.12.2010, has given
the required clarification to the Appellant in respect of the CCS (CCA) Conduct Rules.
3. Upon hearing the Respondents and on perusing the records, I see no infirmity in the Respondents’
replies to the Appellant which are factual and as per records available wit the Public Authority.
Further, the Appellant, except for saying that information given to him is incorrect, misleading etc.,
has not given any cogent reasons in support of his claim. I, therefore, hold that the Respondents
have given adequate information to the Appellant which leaves no scope for any further disclosure in
the present matter.
4. Appeal is, therefore, rejected.
(Annapurna Dixit)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy
(G.Subramanian)
Deputy Registrar
Cc:
1. Shri Harish Kumar Agrawal
Technical Officer Grade T5,
RRC, IGFRI, Village Bharmat, Post Banoori,
Palampur 176 061
2. The Appellate Authority
Department of Personnel & Training (DoPT)
North Block,
New Delhi
3. The Public Information Officer
Department of Personnel & Training (DoPT)
North Block,
New Delhi
4. Officer in charge, NIC