Central Information Commission
CIC/AD/A/2009/001278
Dated January 18, 2010
Name of the Applicant : Mr. Satya Kumar Bej
Name of the Public Authority : Department of Posts
M/o Communication & IT
ADJUNCT TO ORDER DATED 21.10.2009
1. In the captioned matter, during the hearing dated 21.10.2009, based on the facts
of the case, the Commission directed as follows:
"....... 7. The CPIO, O/o CPMG, Orissa Circle, Bhubaneswar to show cause
under Section 20(1) of the RTI Act, why a penalty of Rs.250/ per day should
not be imposed on him for not providing the information despite several
reminders. The response to reach the Commission by 10 November,
2009...."
2. The Commission received a communication dated 06.11.2009 replying to the Show
Cause issued by the Commission vide the aforementioned order. The answering
CPIO submitted that Sh. S N Panda was the CPIO at the relevant point of time and
was the recipient of the letters dated 10.08.09, 11.09.09 and 20.10.09. He was
transferred and relieved on 22.10.09 while the answering CPIO, Sh. K P Parida
joined as AD (Staff) on 23.10.09. It has been further stated by the Respondent that
the reminder letter dated 20.10.09 issued by ADG (SPN) was received by the office
of the CPIO on 22.10.09. The CPIO further explained that the information sought by
the Appellant relates to the year 1992 and despite thorough and sincere search of
the records, only the letter of ad hoc appointment being letter no ST/24-9/83 dated
07.12.92 relating to ASRM cadre of the Appellant and letter no. ST/24-9/94 dated
28.9.95 relating to regular appointment to ASRM cadre could be traced on
05.11.09. However the CPIO submitted that officers responsible for regularization
of adhoc period could not be found despite thorough search on the part of the
Respondent.
This was followed by yet another communication dated 01.12.2009 from the
Respondent Public Authority about the furnishing of the information as directed by
the Commission vide its order dated 21.10.09. It is stated that after receipt of
necessary information from Orissa Postal circle, the case has been referred to
DOP&T on 20.11.09 for their ex-post facto approval to regularize the ad hoc service
of the Appellant in ASRM cadre from 31.12.93 to 28.09.95. It is contended by the
Respondent that the decision of the DOP&T would be conveyed to the Appellant as
soon as the same is received. It is pertinent to note that the Appellant has not
approached the CIC since the decision nor is there any grievance of non compliance
recorded/received at the Commission. In view of the aforesaid facts and
circumstances of the case, the Commission is of the opinion that penal action may
be dropped in this case.
(Annapurna Dixit)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy:
(G. Subramanian)
Deputy Registrar
Cc:
1. Shri Satya Kumar Bej
Ex- Deputy Supdt.
At – Sahadevkhunta
PO/Dist – Balasore
Balasore 756 001
2. The CPIO
Department of Posts
Director (SPN)
Dak Bhawan
Sansad Marg
New Delhi
3. The Appellate Authority
Department of Posts
DDG (Personnel)
Dak Bhawan
Sansad Marg
New Delhi
4. The CPIO &
Director of Postal Services (HQ)
Department of Posts
Orissa Postal Circle
Bhubaneswar
5. Officer in charge, NIC
6. Press E Group, CIC