dsUnzh; lwpuk vk;ksx
Central Information Commission
Case No. CIC/AT/C/2009/000519
Dated: 27th January, 2010
Complainant : Shri Manoj Kumar Gupta
Respondents : Coal India Ltd.
In the appeal-cum-complaint filed by Shri Manoj Kumar Gupta against
Coal India Ltd., Commission passed an Order dated 7.10.2009 in Case Nos.
CIC/AT/A/2009/000605 & CIC/AT/C/2009/000519 and disposed of the appeal.
2. Commission on observing that CPIO and the holders-of-the-information
had not only failed to comply with the appellant’s RTI-application within the
specified period, but they had also failed to comply with the directions dated
7.5.2009 of the Appellate Authority, initiated action under section of 20(1) of the
Right to Information Act, 2005.
3. Accordingly, show cause notices dated 20.10.2009 were issued under
section 20(1) to i) CPIO Shri M.B. Aparajit, Dy. Chief Personnel
Manager(Welfare); ii) Shri Samir Kumar Das, CMM(Vig.) and iii) Shri H.
Kujur, GM(P), the holders-of-the-information and the matter was scheduled for
hearing on 1.12.2009 through video conferencing, which was postponed on a
request from the CPIO.
4. Pursuant to Commission’s notice dated 18.11.2009, the matter was later
heard on 22.12.2009 through video conferencing. Complainant, Shri Manoj
Kumar Gupta was present at NIC VC facility at Nagpur, while AA & CPIO were
present at NIC VC facility at Kolkata.
5. During the hearing, respondents informed that entire range of information
had been provided to the complainant, who also confirmed the receipt of the
requested information. Respondents informed that the then CPIO Shri W. Naseem
Haider, CGM(Welfare) had since retired on 31.3.2009.
Shri Manoj Kumar Gupta Vs. Coal India Ltd. : Case No. C-9/519 Page 1 of 3
6. From the above facts, the following is observed:
Particulars Date RTI request 20.01.2009 RTI request received by Public Authority 29.01.2009
Shri W. Naseem Haider, CGM(Welfare) and the then CPIO sought the 30.01.2009
assistance of Shri H. Kujur GM(P), CIL
Shri H. Kujur informed CPIO that related files were with Vig. Deptt., and 06.02.2009
as such, the information be obtained from them
CPIO Sought the assistance of Shri Samir Kumar Das, CMM(Vig.) 06.02.2009
CMM(Vig.) vide fax message stated that no RTI-request was forwarded, 23.02.2009
hence the same be forwarded to him
Copy of RTI-request forwarded by CPIO to CMM(Vig.) 24.02.2009
CMM(Vig.) informed the CPIO that matter was under investigation and 04.03.2009
information was exempted u/s 8(1)(g) and 8(1)(h) and furnished
information regarding Item No. 4.
The letter of CMM(Vig.) was sent to GM(P) for compliance 05.03.2009
AA passed an order directing CPIO i) to furnish a reply within 10 days; 07.05.2009
and ii) to re-circulate the OM dated 6.2.2009 to all concerned advising
them to furnish information within permissible time.
New CPIO (Shri M.B. Aparajit) circulated the AA's order to GM(P) 11.05.2009 PIO replied to the appellant 18.05.2009
In compliance of Commission’s order dated 7.10.2009, PIO furnished the 13.11.2009
point-wise replies to the appellant
7. From the above facts, it is observed as under:
i) The holders-of-the-information viz., Shri Samir Kumar Das,
CMM(Vig.) and Shri H. Kujur, GM(P) had replied to the then CPIO
well in time.
ii) The delay in the delivery of the information to the appellant was by
the then CPIO Shri W. Naseem Haider, CGM(Welfare), who instead
of replying to the appellant, forwarded a copy of letter of
CMM(Vig.) to GM(P) for compliance.
iii) Shri M.B. Aparajit, Dy. Chief Personnel Manager (Welfare) took over
the charge of CPIO w.e.f. 1.4.2009. He duly complied with the AA’s
orders dated 7.5.2009. He circulated the copy of the AA’s order to
GM(P) on 11.5.2009 and furnished a reply to the appellant on
18.5.2009.
8. Thus, there was no delay on part of the holders-of-the-information viz.,
Shri Samir Kumar Das, CMM(Vig.) and Shri H. Kujur, GM(P); and the present
CPIO Shri M.B. Aparajit, Dy. Chief Personnel Manager(Welfare). Therefore, the
penalty proceedings initiated against them is dropped.
Shri Manoj Kumar Gupta Vs. Coal India Ltd. : Case No. C-9/519 Page 2 of 3
9. There is no doubt, the delay in furnishing the reply to the appellant was on
the part of Shri W. Naseem Haider, the then CPIO, who instead of replying to
the appellant, forwarded a copy of letter dated 4.3.2009 received from
CMM(Vig.) to GM(P) for compliance. However, since Shri Haider’s action
was more a technical error than a deliberate mischief and considering he has now
retired from service on superannuation, it is decided not to initiate penalty
proceedings against him.
10. Complaint is therefore, closed.
11. Copy of this decision be sent to the parties.
Sd/-
( A. N. TIWARI )
Information Commissioner.
Shri Manoj Kumar Gupta Vs. Coal India Ltd. : Case No. C-9/519 Page 3 of 3