CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2011/001983/14589
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2011/001983
Relevant facts emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Jagdish Prasad
R/o- A-10, Shanti Marg,
Flat No. 1, IIIrd Floor,
Mandawali, Fazalpur,
Delhi - 110092.
Respondent : Mr. Basant Lal Kaushik
PIO & Assistant Commissioner (Horti)
Municipal Corporation of Delhi
Horticulture Department.
th
16 Floor, S.P. Mukherjee Civic Centre,
Minto Road, New Delhi - 110002.
RTI application filed on : 01-04-2011
PIO replied on : 28-04-2011
First Appeal filed on : 26-05-2011
First Appellate Authority order of : 04-07-2011
Second Appeal received on : 18-07-2011
Information Sought:
1. Please provide the attested photocopy of existing modified R.R. for the post of
Choudhary in the Hort. Deptt., MCD.
2. Is the R.R. of Choudhary (post) modified from Delhi Government or not? If yes, Please
provide the photocopy of said notification which is issued by the Delhi Government in
this regards.
The PIO reply:
1. Please refer to your application, I.D. No.913 dated 01-04-2011 addressed to the
undersigned supply of information on R.R. for the post of Choudhary.
2. The reply is enclosed.
Grounds for the First Appeal:
Unsatisfactory reply was given to the appellant by the PIO.
Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
"In connection with the above said Appeal the undersigned heard the matter in presence of AO
(Hort.)/HQ and ADH/HQ (APIO) at 11.30 AM on 28.06.2011. On perusal of the record, it was found that
the required information as per availability of the same has been sent to the RTI appellant by the
concerned PIO (Hort,)/HQ vide Letter No. 1846 dated 28.04.2011 and no further information is required
to be provided to the RTI Appellant.
Ground of the Second Appeal:
Unsatisfactory information had been provided by the PIO.
Relevant Facts
emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant : Mr. Jagdish Prasad;
Respondent : Mr. Basant Lal Kaushik, PIO & Assistant Commissioner (Horti);
The Appellant admits that the information on record has been provided to him. He wants the PIO
to inform him that the posts are not notified. The PIO states that as per the records provided to him by the
Appellant the post are notified.
Decision:
The Appeal is disposed.
The information on record has been provided.
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
14 September 2011
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (pr)