CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building, Old JNU Campus,
Opposite Ber Sarai, New Delhi -110067
Tel: + 91 11 26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2009/000978/3705
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2009/000978
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Ram Prasad
6, Behind Lata Cinema,
Johsi Mohall Road ,
Nayak Colony, Jhorwara,
Jaipur-12
Respondent : Mr. R.P.Tripathi
Asst.PIO,
North-Central Railway
Chief Factory Manager,
Rail Spring Factory,
Sithauli, Gauwaliar
RTI application filed on : 21.10.2008
PIO replied : 15.11.2008
First Appeal filed on : 29.11.2008
First Appellate Authority order : Not mentioned.
Second Appeal received on : 30.04.2005
The Appellant sought for information regarding recruitment of 66 workers listed in document for
the post of khalasi Raw substitute factory from Recruitment Cadre Close before date 31.05.1996.
The details of the information sought by the appellant were following:
Sl. Information Sought PIO’s Reply
A. (i) Had 66 workers listed in document been recruited for the From (i) to (iii) the
post of khalasi Raw substitute factory from Recruitment Cadre father’s name and the
Close before date 31.05.1996? if not then when and which post. post of applicant not
(ii) Please present educational and technical qualification with mentioned. Therefore
name of the listed workers. giving desired
information is not
possible.
(iii) How many times had they been promoted? iv) The appellant has not
been promoted till now.
(iv) How may times had the appellant been promoted?
B. Make available the certified photocopies of following through i) and (ii)Get copy from
PIO. the office issued
(i) The letter HPB/228/MI/D/STLI-GWL dated 22.12.1993 sent
to Shri Suresh Kumar, Manager, Ministry Of Railway, Railway
Board.
(ii)Letter -E(NG) 11/93/RC-3/87 sent to General Manager,
Mumbai by Shri M.D. Pillai Deptt. Director Estt (n) Railway
board.
(iii)Letter no.HPB//228/M5-A/STLI-GWL related to Cadre No. of pages is 2. After
Close sent to you on date 23.05.1996 by the CPO Mumbai CST paying fee copy will be
provided.
C. Please inform: i) selection/promotion
i).minimum educational and technical qualification for from the post Helper-1 to
selection/promotion from the post Helper-1 to Technician-III Technician-II is
ii).Has attention by administration been given on such conducted by rules and
promotion/selection? order issued by the
iii).if not, then why? railway board.
iv). If relaxation given, then why?
v).has permission been received from concern officer?
vi).if not, then why?
vii).if yes, then name and post of the officer.
viii). Have such rights been received by the concerned officer
before giving relaxation in minimum educational standards?
ix). If there is disobey of minimum educational standards
applied by railway board, then what action has been taken
against that officer by general manager.
D. Please inform:
i). i) mention minimum educational and technical qualification From (i) to (iv)
for selection/promotion from the post Technician in Group ‘C’ selection/promotion of
to Junior Engineer. the JE-II is conducted by
ii) Was above mentioned followed earlier? rules and order issued by
iii).if not, then why? the railway board.
iv).what has action been taken against the officer who not
followed?
v). After 20 year of establishment of factory, how many junior From (v) to (vii) Due to
engineers having qualification of electronics and belonging to multi trade scheme in rail
SC deployed? spring factory in Sithauli.
vi) If not, then why?
vii) After year 1998, were such workers not available?
viii). What was qualification and age of Shri Kamod, Shri O.P.
Listed workers are
Gaur and Shri Vivek Kumar at the time of deploying as Junior
promoted on reserved
Engineer. post under cadre
restructuring.
E. Certified copy of actions taken on letter mention details in The case related to
document sent by the appellant. seniority is under
Sl. letterNo. Date Registry Date consideration of Division
No. No. level. After finishing it
P 0 07.08.2008 5656 07.08.2008 will make available.
Q 0 30.07.2006 5227 01.08.2006
R 0 27.08.2006 UPC 02.09.2006
S 0 18.07.2006 UPC 23.07.2006
F. Photocopy of (i) letter no. 2006/E/GM/SSV/Sithauli/117 date Mentioned letters not
01.12.2006 received in this office.
And (ii)letterNo.2008E/GM/SSV/Sithauli/2007(this letter is
received by A.P.O Rail Spring factory on 06.10.2008)
G. Please inform total no of objection received and rejected Objection on seniority is
regarding seniority list. under consideration of
Division level.
H. (i)Till what date did Shri Virendra Kumar and Shri Ashok Shri Ashok Singh, Tech-I
Kumar work as Canteen Helper? has worked from date
(ii) What was their training period? 14.11.92 to 30.04.97. The
name of Tech-I worker
Shri Virendra kumar is
not at present.
I. In list on date19.01.2006 and seniority based list From (i) to(iii)There has
P/RSK/STLI/CC/ Helper-I basic Rs.800-1150/2650-4000 RSRP not been restructuring on
and Helper Grade-II (Khallsi) basic Rs 750-940/2550-3200 62 01.06.1996
and 02 workers were presented.
(i). Is the number of listed workers is appropriate to the ratio of
Restructuring applied on date 01.06.1996?
(iii) If not, then why?
(iv) if yes, then explain.
J. (i)How many are total numbers of laptop and computer in From (i) to (iii) it is not
factory? related to working
(iii)Is the technical qualification of Shri Balarm Rajak and Shri department.
Yogesh Nibhairiya related to Electronics Trade?
Grounds for first Appeal:
The Appellant had following point wise grounds:
Q-A i to iii
i) List had been provided without differentiating from other staff, not mentioning their
Father’s name. Hence desired information had not provided.
He requested to provide desired information serial wise and question wise.
Q-D v to vii there was only requested number.
Q-E action report was requested only office of Public Officer-level not Divisional level.
Q-F there was requested only number of objection received and issued.
The First Appellate Authority ordered:
Not mentioned.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant : Mr. Ram Prasad
Respondent : Mr. R.P.Tripathi, APIO
The PIO will provide complete information to the appellant:
1- The PIO will provide complete information to the appellant with respect to Query A.
2- Copies of letter as per Query B-(i) & B-(ii).
3- Query C-The PIO will supply the certified copies.
The appellant is willing to inspect the records and take photocopies of the information which he
wishes.
Decision:
The Appeal is allowed
The PIO will supply the information before 30 June 2009. The PIO will also facilitate inspection of
records to the appellant on 29 June 2009 at 10.00AM. He will give photocopies of records which
the appellant wants free of cost.
This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
15 June 2009
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)
(Rnj)