CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Appeal No. CIC/WB/A/2009/000101 dated 17.2.2009
Right to Information Act 2005 - Section 19
Appellant - Maj. Gen. (retd.) V. K. Singh
Respondent - Department of Personnel & Training
Decision announced: 26.4.2010
Facts
:
By an application of 1.5.08 Maj. Gen. V. K.Singh of Gurgaon (Haryana)
applied to the CPIO, DOPT seeking the following information:
“1. Please provide the list of officers of the rank of Jt. Secy., Spl.
Secy. and Secy. as on 1.1.2001, indicating their names,
cadre, seniority and date of appointment.
2. Please provide the list of officers of the rank of Jt. Secy., Spl.
Secy. and Secy. as on 1.1.2002, indicating their names,
cadre, seniority and date of appointment.
3. Please provide the list of officers of the rank of Jt. Secy., Spl.
Secy. and Secy. as on 1.1.2003, indicating their names,
cadre, seniority and date of appointment.
4. Please provide the list of officers of the rank of Jt. Secy., Spl.
Secy. and Secy. as on 1.1.2004, indicating their names,
cadre, seniority and date of appointment.
5. Please provide the list of officers of the rank of Jt. Secy., Spl.
Secy. and Secy. as on 1.1.2005, indicating their names,
cadre, seniority and date of appointment.
6. Please provide the list of officers of the rank of Jt. Secy., Spl.
Secy. and Secy. as on 1.1.2006, indicating their names,
cadre, seniority and date of appointment.
7. Please provide the list of officers of the rank of Jt. Secy., Spl.
Secy. and Secy. as on 1.1.2007, indicating their names,
cadre, seniority and date of appointment.
8. Please provide the list of officers of the rank of Jt. Secy., Spl.
Secy. and Secy. as on 1.1.2008, indicating their names,
cadre, seniority and date of appointment.
9. Please provide a certified list of officers of the rank of Jt.
Secy., Spl. Secy. and Secy. as on 1.5.2008, available on the
website of the Department of Personnel & Training indicating
their names, cadre, seniority and date of appointment. “
1
To this, the General received a response from CPIO Shri S. K. Mohanty,
Section Officer, informing him as follows:
“It is stated that list of officers of the rank of Joint Secretary,
Additional Secretary, Special Secretary and Secretary on each date
is not maintained in this Department. However, the present of
officers is available on the official website of this Department i.e.
https://persmin.nic.in. “
Aggrieved, Gen. Singh moved an appeal before Shri A. K. Singhal,
Director, DoPT pleading as follows:
“The reply is incomplete and amounts to denial of information. It is
difficult to believe that the department does not have the list of
officers for the preceding seven years. If such lists are maintained,
they must be on a particular date. If the list as on the 1 st day of the
year is not available, the list on any other day of the year can be
provided.”
Upon this, he received an order of 18.6.08 allowing the appeal in part, as
follows:
“While I do believe that the CPIO may not be in possession of such
lists as on 1st Jan of each, but it may be possible to guide the
applicant and provide the information to the extent available.
Therefore, the interests of justice would be served by directing the
CPIO to accord a personal hearing to applicant and provide
information to the extent available by suitably advising him.
The CPIO is directed to complete the entire process within a period
of four weeks.”
In compliance, CPIO Shri Ravinder Kumar, US by letter of July 1, 2008
invited Maj. Gen. Singh to meet CPIO and consequently in a letter of 18.7.08
informed the General that the information sought by him, as available with the
NIC Cell of the Department, has been compiled in 277 pages and the General
was, therefore, requested to pay Rs. 554/- and obtain the information. Upon this,
Gen. Singh protested in a letter of Appellate Authority, Shri A. K. Singhal on
28.7.08 that since the information sought had not been provided in time, he
should be allowed free access in accordance with sub sec. (6) of Sec. 7, which
2
was also agreed to by CPIO Shri Ravinder Kumar in his letter of 6.8.08, with
which he enclosed the information. Upon receipt of this, Gen. Singh in his letter
of 13.8.08 responded as follows:
“Instead of 277 pages, I have received only 183 pages. Details are
as under:
Date Secretaries Addl. Joint
Secretaries Secretaries
1.1.2001 8 14 157
1.1.2002 9 15 165
1.1.2003 15 15 182
1.1.2004 23 28 189
1.1.2005 20 45 205
1.1.2006 22 54 211
1.1.2007 40 66 218
1.1.2008 66 64 239
It appears that some pages are missing, especially pertaining to the
years 2001 to 2006. In addition, I have the following observations-
a) The list does not tally with the list available on your website.
For example, the list of secretaries does not show the names of Secretary
to the President, Principal Secretary to the PM, Secretary (Coord. & PG),
Cabinet Secretary, Secretary (RAW) etc.
b) Appointments outside Delhi appear to have been omitted.
c) The lists are not certified, as requested in my application
dated 1.5.2008.”
Consequently, Section Officer Shri S. K. Mohanty in his letter of 27.8.08
responded as follows:
“Some papers could not have been enclosed with the above
referred letter, inadvertently. The papers are being forwarded
herewith. Hopefully, this would solve the further queries raised by
you in your letter dated 13.8.2008.”
Maj. Gen. V. K. Singh has then moved a second appeal on 11.9.08
pleading, “the information is incomplete and incorrect.” He has gone on to point
out perceived contradictions in the information provided and has specifically
mentioned that several officers of the RAW had not been included in the list.
3
The appeal was heard on 26.4.2010. The following are present:
Appellant
Maj. Gen. V. K. Singh
Respondents
Shri Jai Prakash, US
Shri S. K. Mohanty, S.O.
Shri Jai Prakash, US submitted that he had in his capacity as then CPIO
responded to the appeal dated 11.9.08 of appellant Gen. V. K. Singh, as follows:
“you had sought information relating to the list of officers of the rank
of Joint Secretary, Addl. Secretary, Spl. Secy. And Secy. Indicating
their names, cadres, seniority and date of appointment as on 1st of
January of each year from 2001 to 2008. The information is neither
readily available nor maintained in the format desired by you. In
this regard, it may be noted that the various lists of senior officers
available on the website of this Department are up dated from time
to time as a result of additions or deletions. However, in order to
meet your requirement to the extent possible, the National
Informatics Centre (NIC) of this Department was requested to
retrieve the date to the extent possible from the software in use for
updating the lists appearing under the Tab ‘Citizen corner’ on the
website of the Department of Personnel & Training. So far as your
objection No. 11 in your appeal dated 11.9.2008 is concerned, the
RTI Act does not apply to the Research & Analysis Wing (RAW) of
the Cabinet Secretariat as per Sec. 24 of the RTI Act (Second
Schedule).”
Appellant Maj. Gen. V. K. Singh also agreed that he had received this
information but pointed out that there were wide gaps even in the current
information provided since only some of the officers of RAW have been
mentioned. If on the other hand DOPT stands by its comments in the letter of
26.12.08 regarding exemption granted to RAW u/s 24(1), none of the officers of
RAW should have been mentioned on the website or indeed in the information
provided to him. However, he also pointed out particularly in the case of RAW,
that even the information available on the website and that provided to him was
contradictory.
4
Shri Jai Prakash, US submitted that upon receipt of the orders of the
Appellate Authority, CPIO had taken recourse to obtaining information through
NIC. Since this was not regularly maintained, it was subject to error, and supplied
as held. However, the present list is consistently upgraded and although the list
may change from time to time, it is likely to be up to date.
DECISION NOTICE
Having heard the arguments and examined the records, we find as
follows:
1. Under sec. 4(1)(a), all records that are appropriate to be computerized are
expected to be computerized in DOPT and this will include the list of officers in
any given year serving in the DOPT so as to bring it in line with the spirit of sec.
4(1)(b)(ix). The DOPT is the administrative authority for the implementation of
the RTI Act and it is essential that this Organization develop as a role model in
implementation of the law. Hence u/s 19(8)(a) Shri Shantanu Counsel, Secretary,
DOPT will take such steps to commission the NIC to prepare an up to date
statement of a directory of its officers from time to time for any date, specified by
him from year to year, for the years stretching into the time of records held as per
policy of the department on destruction of records, which information will be
uploaded on the DoPT website for purposes of reference.
2. The complete list of all RAW officers selected by the ACC on the
recommendations of DOPT will be provided. As pointed out by US Shri
Jai Prakash during the hearing in certain cases the ACC may also receive
communication from the Organization itself for appointment of officers.
The communication received from RAW being outside the pale of the RTI
Act, the information provided will not cover such cases.
3. In providing the names of the officers working in RAW, DOPT will take into
account that CBI in its biannual Conference of 26/27-8-2009 has in fact
published, together with its agenda a comprehensive list of RAW officers,
5
the names of which, therefore, are now decidedly in the public domain.
The appeal is thus allowed. There will be no costs.
Announced in the hearing. Notice of this decision be given free of cost to
the parties.
(Wajahat Habibullah)
Chief Information Commissioner
26.4.2010
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.
(Pankaj K.P. Shreyaskar)
Joint Registrar
26.4.2010
6