Central Information Commission
2nd Floor, Room No. 305 B-Wing,
August Kranti Bhawan
Bhikaji Kama Place
New Delhi
Case No. CIC/SS/A/2011/001121
Name of Appellant : Sh. S. Rajendran
(The Appellant was present)
Name of Respondent : D/o Expenditure
(Represented by Sh. R. K .Thapar,
Under Secretary & Sh. Jagdish Chander,
Dy. Secretary)
The matter was heard on : 2.11.2011
ORDER
Sh. S. Rajendran, the Appellant, through his RTI request dated 27.12.2010, sought
information on two points from the PIO of the Respondent Public Authority. He
requested for a copy of the proposal of the M/o Urban Development along with the
speaking order for not agreeing of the proposal by the M/o Finance. On point no. 2 of the
his RTI application he sought information as follows:
“According to NOe2Para (X) of the Resolution of the acceptance of sixth CPC vide
Ministry of Finance (Department of Expenditure) dated 29082008, the accepted entry
grade pay of GroupB cadres is Rs. 4800 in PB2 and after 4 years service is Rs. 5400 as
nonfunctional grade in PB3. I am holding a GroupB Gazetted rand post. As such, I
am entitled the grade pay of Rs. 4800 with effect from 01.01.2006 and after completion
of 4 years in the grade pay of Rs. 5400 at least on personal basis. The correct position as
above may be informed under RTI.
All the required enclosures are attached for your study. I am remitting herewith
the prescribed fee of Rs. 10 (Rupees Ten Only) by means of postal order as required. As I
am due for retirement with effect from 31.01.2011, the information may please be
provided early.”
Sh. R. K. Thapar, Under Secretary / CPIO, replied to the Appellant as follows:
“(i) This department received the proposals from Administrative Ministry on their file
and after taking a decision the same is returned alongwith the advice. Hence, this Deptt.
is not having the communication/notings of M/o Urban Development. However, a copy of
UO Note dated 17.05.2010 of this department for not agreeing to the upgradation of pay
scale of the post of superintendent is enclosed herewith.
(ii) As per the Article 2(f) of the RTI Act, 2005, information means ‘any material n
any form’. The information sought by you does not fall within the ambit of the Section
2(f) of RTI Act.”
Aggrieved with the reply the appellant filed an appeal before the FAA. Sh. Manoj
Sahay, Director (A) / FAA vide his order dated 3.03.2011, reiterated the reply furnished
by the PIO. Not satisfied with the reply the Appellant has filed the present appeal before
the Commission.
The Appellant concludes his appeal filed before the Commission with the
following plea:
“Now, I earnestly place my appeal before the Second Appellate Authority to pass an
order and impress the Ministry of Finance to furnish the desired information on the
applicable entry grade pay to GroupB Gazetted as per note2para(x) of the Resolution
of the acceptance of 6th CPC.
IT is requested that my appeal may please be weighed in its true perspective and
the concerned authorities may be impressed to send the information / reply at the
earliest, for which act of kindness, I would be very much grateful to you, sir.”
From the submissions made by the Appellant and his pleadings it is clear that
through his RTI application he is seeking a decision from the Respondent regarding his
entitlement to GroupB grade pay whereas as per the provisions of the RTI Act, the
Public authority is expected to provide information as it exists in material form. The
Commission finds no infirmity in the replies of the Respondent. Requisite reply available
on record and permissible under the RTI Act has been provided to the Appellant by the
Respondent.
The matter is disposed of on the part of the Commission.
(Sushma Singh)
Information Commissioner
16.11.2011
Authenticated true copy
(D. C. Singh)
Dy.Registrar
Copy to:
1. Sh. S. Rajendran
Central P.W.D., Kendriya Sadan
2nd Floor ‘A’ Wing
Koramangala
Bangalore560034
2. The Public Information Officer
D/o Expenditure
North Block
New Delhi
3. The Appellate Authority
D/o Expenditure
North Block
New Delhi