Central Information Commission
CIC/AD/A/2009/000803
August 03 , 2009
Pronounced on: Sep 15, 2009
Name of the Appellant : Sh. Ashok Kumar Singh
Name of the Public Authority : Ministry of Environment & Forests
Background
1. The Applicant Sh. Ashok Kumar Singh filed RTI application dated 24.01.2009
seeking information about promotions of eligible DDR Forest Rangers of the UP
Subordinate Forest Service to the post of Assistant Conservator of Forest [A.C.F.
for short] in State Forest Service Cadre, UP. The detailed RTI questionnaire
contained 15 questions with regard to:
i. Rules providing for promotion of “Non-members of State Forest Service,
UP” into IFS from 1967 to 2005;
ii. Certified copies of notification of Final initial recruitment list of officers of
State Forest Service Cadre, UP into IFS upto 22nd March 1974;
iii. Certified copies of seniority lists of “Members of State Forest Service
Cadre, UP” on which select lists for promotion into IFS were acted upon
from 1967 to 2005;
iv. Certified copies of Select Lists for promotion into IFS from 1967 to 2005;
v. List of promotee IFS officers of State of UP between 22.02.1974 till date;
vi. Basis of Rules, if any, for consideration of Gradation list prepared on the
status of the officers of State of Forest Service Cadre, UP as on 01.07.99
for promotion into IFS against the vacancies upto 2000;
vii. Cause/effect of diminishing numbers of promotee officers [ACFs] of State
Forest Service Cadre, UP in Select Lists for promotion into IFS etc.
2. The Applicant filed a First Appeal dated 26.03.2009 by Speed Post on 27.03.2009,
upon non receipt of any information from the CPIO against the RTI application.
Subsequently vide letter dated 27.04.2009 the Under Secy. and the Joint Secy. Of
the Respondent Public Authority informed the Appellant that the Appellate
Authority upon considering the CPIO’s reply dated 23.02.3009 found the same to
be adequate. The Appellate Autority in the said letter dated 27.04.2009 had
further directed the CPIO to forward a copy of the Appeal to the State
Government for providing the requisite information directly to the Appellant.
3. However, the Appellant filed a Second Appeal before the CIC on 01.06.2009
contending that the complete observation as made by the AA in his letter dated
27.04.2009 were inadequate and absurd, being based on completely incorrect
facts. The Appellant in his Appeal before the CIC pointed out that the observation
of the Respondent from the very beginning was erroneous on account of the fact
that no First Appeal was filed by the Appellant herein on 23.03.2009. Secondly
the CPIO’s letter no. 15011/14/2009-IFS-II dated 23.02.2009 apparently upheld
and confirmed by the AA was never received by the Appellant. The Appellant in
his First Appeal, inter alia, reiterated contents of the RTI application and made
specific allegations about the utter disregard of the provisions of the RTI Act as
also gross negligence exhibited by the Appellate Authority in overlooking the
seriousness of the matter and affirming the CPIO reply without even considering
whether the said reply from the CPIO was ever received by the Appellant. The
Appellant further averred that the order dated 27.04.2009 passed by the AA was
false, fabricated, insensible and misleading and sought that precise information
be furnished against his RTI request.
4. The Bench of Mrs. Annapurna Dixit, Information Commissioner scheduled a
hearing on 20.08.2009 and the parties were intimated accordingly vide CIC’s
notice dated 03.08.2009.
5. Sh. A K Lal, Director represented the Public Authority.
6. Sh. Ashok Kumar Singh, in person alongwith Sh. Subhash Chandra Sinha were
present during the hearing.
DECISION
7. During the hearing, it was observed by the Commission that no document
purported to be the CPIO’s reply as indicated in the AA’s order dated 27.04.2009
was indeed found on record, nor was the same produced/submitted by the
representative of the Respondent Public Authority. A correspondence dated
06.05.2009 issued by the Under Secy., MoEF was produced indicating that the
Appeal filed by the Appellant was sought to be transferred invoking provisions of
Section 6(3) of the RTI Act 2005, to the State Government of Uttar Pradesh,
Secretariat, incorrectly addressed to the Chief Secretary instead of the concerned
SPIO. Hence the Commission at the outset issues a Show Cause notice upon the
CPIO for such improper handling of the matter clearly reflecting gross negligence
on the part of the Respondent Public Authority and for the inordinate delay of the
CPIO in even application of the Section 6(3) of the RTI Act 2005.
8. While discussing the merits of the case based on the voluminous submissions of
the Appellant it became apparent that no information had been provided to the
Appellant from either the Central [Delhi] or the State [UP] Public Authorities. The
representative of the Respondent submitted that most of the information sought
by the Appellant were available in files maintained by the State Authorities. It was
further reasoned by the Respondent’s representative that while promotion of the
officers from the State cadre of Forest Service to the IFS were dealt by the
Central Government, the promotion of the Range officers to the grade of State
Forest Officer was handled by the concerned State Government, which in this case
would be the State of UP. Hence the information relating to promotion/s of Range
officer/s to the State Forest officer grade would be available with the concerned
State Government.
9. After hearing the detailed arguments and perusal of the material on record, it is
apparent that some of the queries as sought by the Appellant do not fall within
the purview of the RTI Act 2005 since they can be responded only in the form of
opinion/s and no information has been sought which exists on records.
Accordingly the queries numbered as points 9 to 15 are dismissed. Some of the
questions in the RTI application can be answered by the State Authorities as
discussed hereinabove and as agreed by the parties. Accordingly, the queries
numbered as point 3, 6 and 7 to be responded with available information by the
SPIO. As against the query number 6 specifically the only Gradation/Seniority list
of the State Forest cadre prepared in the last 42 years, as contended by the
Appellant, be provided. The Commission further directs that against query number
1 the CPIO is directed to clarify the point with respect to the list annexed with RTI
Application as Annexure 22 on page 249; as against the query number 2 the CPIO
is directed to provide information referring to the notification dated 22.03.1974;
CPIO to provide information as sought by the Appellant against the query number
4 and against the query number 5 the CPIO is directed to furnish information
stating as to whether the files have been weeded out and provide evidence
thereof in the form of an Affidavit to be furnished by the AA clarifying under which
Rule was the weeding process undertaken and when. In the event that the
relevant files are misplaced and/or untraceable, FIR to be lodged in this regard
and copies thereof to be furnished. Since the representative of the Respondent
present during the hearing agreed with the Appellant on the query number 8, the
same to be accordingly responded to by the CPIO. The CPIO and SPIO are
directed by the Commission to provide the information as discussed hereinabove
by 6th October 2009 under intimation to the Commission.
10. The appeal is accordingly disposed of.
Decision in the matter was reserved and pronounced in open Court on 15th September
2009.
(Annapurna Dixit)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy:
(G. Subramanian)
Assistant Registrar
Cc:
1. Shri Ashok Kumar Singh
Range Forest Officer
Social Forestry Division
Barabanki
Uttar Pradesh
2. The CPIO
M/o Environment & Forests
Paryavaran Bhavan
CGO Complex
Lodhi Road
New Delhi 110 003
3. Shri Hem Pande
The Appellate Authority &
Joint Secretary
M/o Environment & Forests
Paryavaran Bhavan
CGO Complex
Lodhi Road
New Delhi 110 003
4. Officer incharge, NIC
5. Press E Group, CIC