CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Appeal No.3034/ICPB/2008
F. No. PBA/2008/0550
November 17, 2008
In the matter of Right to Information Act, 2005 - Section 19
[Hearing at Puducherry on 31.10.2008 at.1.15 p.m.]
Appellant: Mr. S. Madasamy
Public authority: Labour Department
Mr. S.D. Sunderesan, Labour Commissioner & CPIO
Parties Present: For Respondent:
Mr. S.D. Sunderesan, Labour Commissioner
Mr. S. Madasamy-Appellant
FACTS
:
The appellant has sought information under RTI Act by his letter dated
12.9.2007 addressed to PIO, Labour Department, Puducherry regarding action
taken for claiming or disbursing leave salary for the period of HPL sanctioned by
the department. The Deputy Labour Commissioner-cum-APIO by his letter dated
11.10.2007 has given his reply by enclosing an annexure containing the details
furnished by the Head of Office of the office of Chief Inspector of factories,
Puducherry. Not satisfied with this reply the appellant preferred his appeal
before the first AA on 26.11.2007. The AA vide order dated 4.1.2008 has
disposed of the appeal by reiterating the decision of the PIO. Aggrieved with the
decision of the public authority the appellant preferred this appeal before the
Commission on 25.3.2008. Comments were called for from the public authority,
which was received from Commissioner-cum-PIO on 15.7.2008. This case was
taken up for hearing on 31.10.2008, which was attended by appellant in person
and pubic authority was represented by the Labour Commissioner.
DECISION:
2. I have gone through the RTI application and other replies received in this
connection. During the hearing, it was clarified that while preparing the salary
bill, it was found that the dues of the appellant was more than what has to be
drawn. After getting relieved from one post he has not joined the new post and
this period has been treated as half-pay leave. The appellant has filed
application before the PIO telling that the Department has sanctioned half-pay
leave, but he has not received payment from the DDO and now the plea taken by
the PIO is unless he furnishes income tax particulars it will not be possible for
1
them to calculate the pay dues. In the meantime, there is no indication in the
records that the DDO has written a letter to him in this regard. Whatever letter
DDO supposedly sent to the appellant he has not received on account of which
he has not furnished the income tax particulars. Therefore, I direct the PIO to
furnish the DDO’s reference letter, which he has forwarded to the appellant along
with status of the case in a detailed manner within 15 days from the date of
receipt of this decision. Upon receipt of this letter the appellant will submit
whatever the details asked for and the PIO has been directed to submit his final
reply within 15 days thereafter. On these lines, the appeal is 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. Mr. S.D. Sunderesan, Labour Commissioner & CPIO, Labour Department,
Govt. of Puducherry, Puducherry-6
2. Mr. S. Madasamy, No. 37, 6th Cross Street, Kumaran Nagar, Extension,
Lawspet, Puducherry-605008
2