CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office),
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067.
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2011/002176/15269
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2011/002176
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Jai Shankar
8/5, Kesari Mohalla,
Sarcular Road, Shahdara, Delhi – 110032.
Respondent : Mr. Anil Kumar Sharma
Deemed PIO & EE(E-VI)
Municipal Corporation of Delhi
O/o The Executive Engineer (Electrical-VI)
(Shahdara North Zone), Keshav Chowk,
G. T. Road, Shahdara, Delhi
RTI application filed on : 19/04/2011
PIO replied : 27/05/2011
First appeal filed on : 30/05/2011
First Appellate Authority order : 14/07/2011
Second Appeal received on : 05/08/2011
Sl. Information sought Reply of PIO
1. February 2004 – Rs.200 in Rs.500 loan. It is not related to this
November 2005 – Rs.200 in Rs. 500 loan. department.
May 2006 – Rs.200 in Rs.500 loan.
January 2007 – Rs200 in Rs.500 loan.
December 2007 – Rs.200 in Rs.1000 loan.
Why the above mentioned loan is not being sent into my fund? When
it will be come into my fund. Give the reasons for late, can this be
improved? If yes, then give the reply with proof.
2. When I will the get the pay scale of 3050-4590, I have been working This decision is taken by the
in Municipal Corporation of Delhi for 24 years. committee made by
Department.
Grounds for First Appeal:
Unsatisfactory response received from the PIO.
Order of the First Appellate Authority:
The main ground for appeal was non receipt of information within 30 days. However, reply has been since
been furnished by the PIO vide letter No.ENG/2011/1012432 dated 27.05.2011. The appellant was
apparently not satisfied with the information supplied by the PIO. The information supplied the PIO was
discussed in detail and it was noted that the information supplied is as per information desired by the
appellant and therefore there is no need for further orders in this case.
Grounds for Second Appeal:
Unsatisfactory information had been provided by the PIO.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Appellant : Mr. Jai Shankar;
Respondent : Mr. Anil Kumar Sharma, Deemed PIO & EE(E-VI);
The Appellant has been provided information available on the records. The Appellant has a
grievance that he has not been given remuneration as per the rules. This is not the matter over which the
Commission has any jurisdiction.
Decision:
The appeal is disposed.
Information available on the records 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 cost as per Section 7(6) of RTI Ac.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
21 October 2011
(In any correspondence on this decision, mentioned the complete decision number.)(ved)