CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2009/002882/6180
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2009/002882
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Ramesh Chand Jain
House No. T-355/1, Gali No. 10
Delhi - 110093.
Respondent : Ms. Renu Popli
Public Information Officer & Senior Manager
Delhi Transport Corporation,
B.B.M. Complex,
Delhi – 110009.
RTI application filed on : 03-07-2009 PIO replied : 28-07-2009 First appeal filed on : 19-08-2009 First Appellate Authority order : 24-09-2009 Second Appeal received on : 10-11-2009 Date of Notice of Hearing : 27/11/2009 Hearing Held on : 31/12/2009
The Appellant had sought following information from PIO – DTC regarding pension of 5
DTC employees.
S. No. sought Information PIO’s reply
1. Appellant sought the following information under Pension has been granted to all DTC
RTI Act, 2009:- employee’s with the pension rule. All
DTC informed that pension was granted to all DTC information had been granted to the
employees as per pension rules. In this connection appellant and no more information is
appellant wanted to know from DTC, whether available in addition.
DTC had granted pension to five employees whose
services was less than 10 yrs. Whether DTC
granted them pension under pension rules if yes,
copy of the pension rules be provided.
2. After loosing case from Hon’ble Court, DTC DTC had been granted pension to
granted pension 2/3 employees whose services three employees after losing the case
were less than 10 yrs. He wanted to know whether in the court. DTC had followed the
DTC treated their services 10 yrs. After losing the court’s order.
case from the court.
3. DTC granted pension to five employees whose Appellant is not sought any
services were less than 10 yrs. Appellant wanted to information in this question.
know, whether any employees has similar case and Therefore, cannot be given answer of
demands for pension, whether DTC will grant him this question.
pension or compel them to go in the court be
intimated.
Ground of the First Appeal:
Incomplete information has been provided to the appellant.
Order of the FAA:
“As regards, point no. 01 & 02 of his said RTI application, a specific reply be furnished
to the appellant within 07 days of the issue of this appeal order by the Sr. Manager (A/cs)
Pension. The appellant is also satisfied with the information already furnished to him in respect
of point no. 03 of his RTI Application”.
Ground of the Second Appeal:
The incomplete information had been provided by the PIO and not truly order had been
passed by the F.A.A.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant : Mr. Ramesh Chand Jain;
Respondent : Ms. Renu Popli, Public Information Officer & Senior Manager;
The PIO has provided all the available records to the Appellant. The appellant has a
grievance that he should be given pension and he is agitating the matter in the Court. He expects
the Commission to give an order that pension should be provided to him. This is not the
jurisdiction of the Information Commission.
Decision:
The Appeal is disposed.
All available information has been provided to the Appellant.
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
31 December 2009
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (BK)