CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2010/001768/8813Adjunct
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/001768
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Mr. Rajendra Gupta
704, G.T. Road,
Shahdara
Delhi-110032
Respondent : Mr. Rajinder Sharma
Public Information Officer &
Administrative Officer
Municipal Corporation of Delhi
Central Establishment Department
Town Hall, Delhi-110006
RTI application filed on : 11/03/2010
PIO replied : 30/04/2010
First appeal filed on : 11/05/2010
First Appellate Authority order : Not ordered
Second Appeal received on : 24/06/2010
Sl. Information Sought Reply of the PIO
1. Please let the Appellant know about the present status of This matter is sub-judice.
the resolution No. 569 dated 14/01/2008 passed by the
Corporation and the detail of the procedures that is
followed after the proposal is passed and was this proposal
passed after consulting the Public Authorities and if yes
then please provide the diary no. and date along with the
certified copy of the same.
2. Which department was responsible for making of the This is an administrative matter.
above said proposal and under what provisions was it kept
in the house? Despite of this resolution being passed why
has it not been implemented so far? The Hon’ble CAT had
also ordered for its implementation but the same has not
been done so has the MCD applied in the High Court for
going against the same?
3. Detail of the designations and the no. of designations that Total 71 designations have been filed.
have been filled by the Central Establishment Department From upper to chief clerical posts 60
from the past 3 years. seats have been filled up and from
chief to superintendent posts 109 seats
have been filled up.
4. Which all members are there in the Departmental This is answered as per the rules.
Promotion Committee? What is the system and the work
procedure of this committee and is there a specific date,
Page 1 of 3
month or year for this. Please also provide the detail of the
action taken and the minutes of the meeting.
5. Has the Central Establishment Department uploaded As query no. 3
anything on the website regarding the same for bringing
transparency in the department? Can a qualified employee
apply for the vacant post through the website? What steps
are being taken for implementation of the paperless office?
6. Detail of the amendments that take place in the RR and the As per the Manual of Office
procedure followed for the same and the time taken for the Procedures.
same?
7. Detail of the employees who have been employed in the No such information is available in
Central Establishment Department with their name, this office.
designation and working experience with the department
for the period three, five and seven years.
Grounds for the First Appeal:
Unsatisfactory information provided by the PIO.
Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
Not ordered.
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
Unsatisfactory information provided by the PIO and no order by the FAA.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing dated August 3, 2010:
The following were present
Appellant: Mr. Rajendra Gupta;
Respondent: Mr. Anil Gupta AO, Mr. M. K. Bhardwaj AO on behalf of Mr. Rajinder Sharma, Public
Information Officer & Administrative Officer;
“The PIO has provided adequate information to the appellant and some lists which the PIO claims
have been sent the appellant is stating have not been received. The appellant would like to inspect the
records. The Commission directs the PIO to facilitate an inspection of the records by appellant on
19/08/2010 from 11.00am onwards at the office of Administrative Officer, Establishment-II at Room no.
124, Town Hall, Delhi – 110006. The PIO will also provide a copy of the Court Decision in which the
department has challenged the CAT Order. The PIO states that he had provided some information on
31/03/2010. In view of this there can be no ground for penalty imposition.”
Decision dated August 3, 2010:
The Appeal was allowed.
“The PIO will facilitate an inspection of the records by the appellant on 19/08/2010 from
11.00onwards. The PIO will give attested photocopies of records which the appellant wants free of cost
upto 300 pages.”
Facts leading to hearing held on November 3, 2010:
The Commission received a letter dated 08/09/2010 from the Appellant stating that on 19/08/2010, he had
received 42 pages after inspection of the records. The Appellant alleged that on 19/08/2010, Mr. Rajendra
Sharma, PIO assured him that the residual information shall be provided within 10 days. However, no
information was provided to the Appellant after 19/08/2010. By notice dated 22/09/2010, the Commission
scheduled a hearing on 03/11/2010 to decide whether there has been non- compliance of the
Commission’s order dated 03/08/2010.
Page 2 of 3
Relevant facts emerging in hearing held on November 3, 2010:
The following were present:
Appellant: Mr. Rajendra Gupta, Mr. Rajesh Nigam and Ms. Ranju Gupta;
Respondent: Mr. Rajendra Sharma, PIO & AO and Mr. Gajendra Singh, UDC;
The appellant has done the inspection in one office and subsequently there was an understanding
between the PIO and the Appellant that the other PIOs would send the information to him. The appellant
is not happy with the information provided and the Commission believes that he would get the satisfactory
information only if he would inspect the records.
Adjunct Decision:
The PIO is directed to facilitate an inspection of the records with Mr. Anil Gupta,
Mr. M. K. Bhardwaj and Mr. Tanuj Bhanot on 17, 18 & 19 November 2010 from
10.30AM onwards. All three officers are directed to cooperate with the inspection. The
appellant would be given attested photocopies of records which he wants free of cost upto
300 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
November 3, 2010
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(IN)
Page 3 of 3