CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2010/002018/9394
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/002018
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Mr. Satya Pal
M 259. Block No 6
Senior Citizens Resorts, Ashiana Utsav,
Ashiana Village, Bhiwadi – 301019
Rajasthan.
Respondent : Mrs. Sunita Bhargava
Deemed PIO & Vice Principal
Govt. of NCT of Delhi
Govt. Sarvodaya Co-ed Vidyalaya
Shah Pur Jat (Khel Gaon),
New Delhi - 110049
RTI application filed on : 26/02/2010
PIO replied : 23/03/2010
First appeal filed on : 02/04/2010
First Appellate Authority order : 25/05/2010
Second Appeal received on : 15/07/2010
S. No Information Sought (with reference to grant Reply of the Public Information Officer (PIO)
of selection scale to govt. school teachers
retired from school as librarian in 1998).
The Appellant has also mentioned the Letter
No DT/RTI ID NO 1281/2009/70717-30819
dated 03/11/2009.
1. The reasons why the Appellant had been Medical expenses to the tune of Rs 618653 was
awarded the selection scale. reimbursed and passed for Rs. 382517/- after the
approval and sanction of the competent authority.
Any confusion regarding the matter can be clarified
with the PIO. All the previous medical claims have
been approved. However, unpaid bill, if any may be
re-submitted by the Appellant for clearance.
2. Name of the officer responsible for the “As far as selection grade is concerned the previous
financial loss in the form of denial of pension. documents submitted by this office and file
prepared during the month of Oct 2009 are linked
with after a lot of effort.” Since the Appellant had
now submitted the documents his case for grant of
selection was being submitted to the concerned
authority for necessary action. The Appellant would
be informed accordingly.
3. The Appellant had written 4 letters to the
Department and the school regarding grant of
selection grade but had not replied any
information from them.
Page 1 of 2
Grounds for the First Appeal:
Unsatisfactory information provided by the PIO.
Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
The FAA (for query no 2) directed the DDE/PIO (South) to re-examine the case administratively and
inform the Appellant within 10 days.
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
Unsatisfactory information provided by the PIO and the FAA.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Appellant: Absent;
Respondent: Mrs. Sunita Bhargava, Deemed PIO & Vice Principal;
The respondent states that the selection grade of the appellant has been approved by the
department and bill is in process. A perusal of the information provided appears to show that the
information has been provided.
Decision:
The Appeal is disposed.
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
16 September 2010
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(RR)
Page 2 of 2