450 ManishAgnihotriVsEPFONewDlhi 31 07 10 1
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Room No.308, B wing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi-110066
Appeal No. CIC/LS/A/2009/000450
Appellant: Shri Manish Agnihotri
Public Authority: EPFO, New Delhi
(through Shri Vivek Kumar,
Deputy Director(Vig.)&CPIO(V)/HQ)
Date of Hearing: 31/07/2009
Date of Decision: 31/07/2009
FACTS
:-
By his letter of 11/09/2008, the Appellant had sought information on the
following four paras:-
“1) Copy of reference sent by Chairman, CBDT to Central Vigilance
Commission in case of Shri Maneesh Agnihotri seeking advise
regarding denial of prosecution sanction.
2) Copy of advice rendered by Central Vigilance Commission in case
of Shri Maneesh Agnihotri.
3) Copies of all note sheets of the files sent to Chairman CBT by
EPFO seeking sanction for prosecution (Covering all 5 FIRs).
4) Shy separate files were sent to Chairman CBT when CVC advise
was available denying sanction for prosecution in all cases passed
by Shri Maneesh Agnihotri?”
2. The mater was disposed of by CPIO, vide order dated 13/10/2008 and thereafter
by the Appellate Authority vide order dated 27/11/2008.
3. Aggrieved with the orders, he has filed the present Appeal.
4. Heard on 31/07/2009. Appellant not present. The public authority is represented
by the officer named above. It is the submission of Shri Vivek Kumar that information
has already been provided to the Appellant in regard to paras 1 & 2. In para 4, the
Appellant has raised a query which does not fall in the ambit of ‘information’ as defined
u/s 2(f) of the RTI Act. However, as regards para 3, the copies of the note sheets cannot
be provided at this stage as a formal charge-sheet is yet to be issued to the Appellant. It
is also his submission that as and when the charge sheet is issued to the Appellant, he
would be entitled to be given copies of the statements of witnesses and other
documentary evidence which is proffered against him, with a view to enabling him to
defend himself properly. According to him, the note sheets are nothing but internal
notings of the officers which are not going to be relied upon in the departmental
proceedings and, therefore, denial of notesheets is not violative of any prescribed Rules
450 ManishAgnihotriVsEPFONewDlhi 31 07 10 2
for the conduct of departmental proceedings. Nor it is violative of the principles of
natural justice.
DECISION
5. I find force in the submissions of Shri Vivek Kumar. The disclosure of
notesheets at this stage is going to be detrimental to the proposed departmental
proceedings. Hence, the orders of CPIO & AA are upheld and the appeal is dismissed.
Sd/-
(M.L. Sharma)
Central Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against application and payment of the charges,
prescribed under the Act, to the CPIO of this Commission.
(K.L. Das)
Assistant Registrar
Tele: 011 2671 73 53
Fax: 011 2610 62 76
Copy to:-
(1) Shri Manish Agnihotri,
6/-IV-Type, EPF Colony,
Shyam Bagh, Umred Road,
Nagpur, Maharashtra-440024.
(2) The Chief Vigilance Officer & AA,
Vigilance Directorate, EPFO,
Bhavishya Nidhi Bhawan,
14, Bhikaji Cama Place,
New Delhi-110066.
(3) Shri Vivek Kumar
Deputy Director(Vig.)&(CPIO)(V)/HQ,
EPFO, Bhavishya Nidhi Bhawan,
14, Bhikaji Cama Place,
New Delhi-110066.