CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Appeal No.2604 to 2406/ICPB/2008
F.No.PBC/07/446, 458 & 459
August 5, 2008
In the matter of Right to Information Act, 2005 - Section 18/19
[Hearing on 21.7.2008 through Video Conferencing between New Delhi-Puducherry-Yanam at 12.30 p.m.]
Appellant : Mr. P. Veerappan
Public authority: Town Employment Exchange
Ms. Gowri Saroja, Asst. Emp. Officer & CPIO
Present: For Respondents:
Ms. Gowri Saroja, Asst. Emp. Officer
Appellant not present.
DECISION
These appeals filed by the appellant against the decision of the public authorities
of Town Employment Exchange, Government of Puducherry, Yanam have been taken
together for hearing through Video Conferencing on 21.7.2008, which was attended by
the respondent from Studio at Puducherry. The appellant did not present himself for
hearing. After going through the RTI applications and replies received in the matter and
after deliberations of the matters in the hearing, the matters are discussed and disposed
of as under:
F.No.PBC/07/446: Vide his application dated 23.3.2007, the appellant has
sought for the following:
(i) region-wise list of industrial establishments those were received standing
order certificate from the Labour Department;
(ii) list of Registered Trade Unions along with other details;
(iii) region-wise Industrial disputes settled by/pending with by the Labour
Conciliation Officer and Labour court/Industrial Tribunal.
The PIO vide letter dated 6.9.2007 has replied the appellant to obtain the information
from the office of the Town Employment Exchange, Yanam. However, having not
received any reply the appellant preferred this appeal before the Commission on
29.10.2007. Comments were called for from the public authority which was received
vide letter dated 4.1.2008. The appellant has sent his letter 1.3.2008 stating that he
could not file his rejoinder as comments have not been sent to him. During the hearing,
the PIO has stated that she has obtained information from the Labour Department,
Puducherry and sent it to the appellant free of cost. It is noticed the appellant is a
habitual information seeker asking for voluminous information. Moreover the appellant
could not establish any overriding public interest in his applications. Even otherwise,
under RTI Act, only the information that are available with the pubic authority alone can
be given. There is no need to compile any information to meet the requirement of the
appellant. In this appeal, the appellant has been finally provided information free of
1
cost. Hence, if the appellant is not still satisfied he can file an appeal before the first
Appellate Authority.
F.No.PBC/07/458: In this appeal the appellant by his letter dated 23.03.2007 has
asked the PIO to furnish the lists of shops and establishments and catering
establishment and Industries/factories/ company obtained registration at Yanam Region
as on 12.3.2007. The PIO has given reply on 6.9.2007. The PIO reiterated that the
appellant has been given information as obtained from the Labour Department from
Puducherry. Hence, if the appellant is not satisfied he should prefer an appeal before
the first AA.
F.No.PBC/07/459: In this appeal the appellant by his RTI application dated
23.3.2007 has asked for the region-wise, GITI-wise, trade-wise list of vocational
instructors and group instructors working in Govt. ITI with the details of name, monthly
remuneration received for Feb 2007 along with various other details. The PIO vide his
letter dated 6.9.2007 has requested the appellant to obtain the information asked by him
from the office of Town Employment Exchange, Yanam. Not satisfied the appellant
preferred this appeal before the Commission on 29.10.2007. Comments were called for
from the public authority vide letter dated 29.12.2007 and the same has been received
on 4.1.2008. During the hearing the PIO reiterated that the information as obtained
from the Labour Department has already been given to the appellant free of cost.
Hence, if the appellant is not satisfied he should file his appeal before the first appellate
authority.
In all these appeals though there is enormous delay in furnishing information,
however, the delay has been adequately explained. Moreover, the PIO has to give the
particulars of first appellate authority in his reply. This should be noted very strictly in
future.
In case if the appellant is not satisfied even after the disposal of the appeal by
the first appellate authority, who is the Labour Commissioner, Pudhcyerry, he is at
liberty to approach the Commission once again.
On these lines, all these three appeals stand disposed of.
Let a copy of this decision be sent to the appellant and CPIO.
Sd/-
(Padma Balasubramanian)
Central Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy :
(Prem Singh Sagar)
Under Secretary & Assistant Registrar
Address of parties :
1. Ms. Gowri Saroja, Asst. Emp. Officer & CPIO, Town Employment Exchange,
Yanam, Puducherry.
2. Mr. P. Veerappan, No. 6, 132/11, K.V. Sub Station Quarters, Mettacur, Yanam-
533464
2