Mr.Rajendra Kumar vs G.T.B. Hospital, Delhi. on 10 November, 2008

Central Information Commission
Mr.Rajendra Kumar vs G.T.B. Hospital, Delhi. on 10 November, 2008
                               Room No.415, 4th Floor, Block IV,
                             Old JNU Campus, New Delhi -110 066.
                                    Tel: + 91 11 26161796

                                    Decision No. CIC/WB/A/2008/01190//SG/00183
                                                Appeal No. CIC/WB/A/2008/01190
Relevant Facts

emerging from the Appeal

Appellant : Mr.Rajendra Kumar,
13 Shiva Khand,
Vishvkarma Nagar,

Respondent 1 : Public Information Officer under RTI
Act 2005
G.T.B. Hospital, Dilshad Garden,

RTI filed on                             :        29/03/2007
PIO replied                              :        28/04/2007
First appeal filed on                    :        09/05/2007
First Appellate Authority order          :
Second Appeal filed on                   :
Sl.                   Question                                        Answer
1      In how many years a official               After 12 years and 24 years of regular service
       Will get the benefit of ACP                from the date of appointment.
2      Whether it is the responsibility           It is administrations responsibility.
       of the official to inform the
        department on completion
       of required time period or
       of department ?
3      What are the fundamental                   Photocopy attached.
        directions for ACP ? Please
        enclose the documents.
4      In the last 3 years, how many              04
       LDC have been completed the
       required service period ?
5      In the last 3 years, how many              05
       LDC have been benefited by
       ACP ? Furnish the name and
       date of ACP granted to them?
6      How many official have not                 ACP to LDCs has been granted by the
       been benefited by ACP after                services department. GNCT of Delhi.
       completing the required
       service period and why?
7      The kind of departmental inquiry           No one

initiated against the officials/officer.
8 When will this process As per the rules.

Be completed ?.

9 Those official who have been Not applicable.

left will be benefited by
ACP in what time?

After the First appeal some additional information and some corrected information was
supplied. Appellant alleges false information given by PIO and the Appellate authority and
the PIO were the same person.

Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Appellant : Mr. Subhash Chand on behalf of Mr.Rajendra Kumar
Respondent : Dr. N.K.Agarwal, PIO and Dr. P.C.Dikshit First appellate authority
The respondent accepts that some delay has occurred which was due to the illness of the PIO
Dr.Sinha at the time of the RTI application. The only information now balance is the
authority who can initiate actions against officers. The respondent says this is with the
Services department of NCT Delhi. They should have given this in writing earlier.

Decision :

The appeal is allowed.

The full information on point 6 will be furnished.
There has been a delay in providing information and the PIO is warned to ensure timely and
full information. There appears no malafide, hence no order is made about penalty

This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.

Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
10th November 08.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. More Information