CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2011/000091/11511
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2011/000091
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Ms. Priyanka Sinha
C/o. Pratidhi
Room No. 39, 2nd Floor,
Shakarpur Police Station Complex
Ramesh Park, Pushta Road, Delhi 110092
Respondent : Mr. V. P. Singh
SDM (Defence Colony) & PIO
Govt. of NCT of Delhi, Revenue Department
O/o the SDM, District (South)
M.B. Road, Saket, New Delhi
RTI application filed on : 24/07/2010
PIO replied : 18/08/2010
First appeal filed on : 22/09/2010
First Appellate Authority order : 04/11/2010
Second Appeal received on : 10/01/2011
Information Sought:-
This is in reference to the rescued Child Labor by the South Delhi district and who are further
declared as Bonded Labor. In some cases the children were given subsistence allowance of Rs. 1000 to
each child and release certificates were also issued by the SDMs.
So, the applicant seeks to know as to under what scheme the Subsistence allowance was provided.
Kindly provide a copy of the document related to this assistance scheme for the rehabilitation of the
Bonded Labour.
Reply of the Public Information Officer (PIO):-
“This is with reference to your above cited RTI application dated 02/08/10, it informed that under
the relevant provisions of Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, an individual who was identified as
bonded labour must be given its 1,000/- on his release by the district authorities as interim compensation.
In few cases this office had given Rs 1000/- to each bonded labourer for repatriation to his native place in
earlier occasions.”
Grounds for the First Appeal:
Unsatisfactory & incomplete information provided by PIO
Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
“On perusal of the appeal filed by Ms. Priyanka Sinha, it appears that the reply has been furnished
by the PIO/SDM(DC) well in time vide letter dated 18.8.2010 but the appellant was not satisfied with the
reply/information. During the course of discussion in the appeal, I have noticed that the questions asked
by the applicant under the RTI are vague. Under these circumstances, I have no option but to reject the
appeal.”
Page 1 of 2
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
Unsatisfactory & incomplete information received from PIO and FAA.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant: Ms. Priyanka Sinha;
Respondent: Mr. V. P. Singh, SDM (Defence Colony) & PIO;
The PIO states that the information has been provided to the appellant that Rs.1000/- given to the
children rescued from bonded labour has been given earlier from a miscellaneous fund. The Appellant
states that as per the centrally sponsored scheme and Delhi High Court order Rs.20000/- should be
recovered from the defaulting employers and paid to the children who have been rescued from bonded
labour. The Appellant states that this is not happening.
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 March 2011
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(KJ)
Page 2 of 2