Central Information Commission
Appeal No. CIC/WB/A/2007/00590-SM dated 22.05.2007
Right to Information Act-2005 - Under Section (19)
Dated 31.10.2008
Appellant - Shri Rajesh Hooda
Respondents - Director General of Military Intelligence, Army HQ,
Ministry of Defence
Shri Rajesh Hooda, Appellant, was personally present.
Respondents, the following were present:-
1. Mukat Singh, Director
2. Col. R. K. Bhardwarj, Joint Director
3. Brig. P Chakraborty, DDG, RTI
4. Maj. M. Gahlot, GSO-1, (Legal), RTI
The brief facts of the case are as under:-
Shri Rajesh Hooda had approached the CPIO in the Sena Bhawan,
Ministry of Defence on 23.07.2006 seeking information on a number of issues
concerning his rehabilitation as a disabled soldier of the Operation Vijay. The
CPIO responded to this request much beyond the stipulated period, on
22.02.2007 and provided the information sought. The CPIO followed up with
some additional information on 09.03.2007. In a related matter arising out of his
appeal before this Commission (File No. CIC/AT/A/2007/00055) dated
19.03.2007, the Commission had directed the Respondents to furnish some
information to the Appellant, and some additional information pertaining to his
queries were sent on 23.03.2007.
2. Dissatisfied with the reply received from the CPIO, Shri Hooda preferred
an appeal before the First Appellate Authority which was disposed off on
18.05.2007 including therewith a copy of the reply dated 11.05.2007 sent by the
PIO at the Integrated HQ of MOD (Army). It is against the decision of the First
Appellate Authority that Shri Hooda has filed the second appeal before us. He has
alleged that the information provided to him is incomplete and inadequate.
3. The Respondents present, filed some additional papers by way of reply to
the appeal, which is placed in the file. Besides, they argued that all the
information sought had been disclosed to the Appellant and there was nothing
more to be given.
4. It is to be noted that the Appellant had asked for the following
information:-
(i) The reasons for not informing him in time for his dependent to apply
for a job offered by the Indian Railways for the dependents of disabled
soldiers of the Kargil War.
(ii) The reasons for which the Ministry of Defence, Army Headquarters not
providing him with employment even though the Central Employment
Exchange had placed him in the first priority.
(iii) Details about the facilities/priority available to his children for
studying in Military School/Sainik School, Army School and Central
School as a disabled soldier of the Indian Army.
(iv) The reasons as to why his name did not appear in the list of disabled
soldiers whom petrol pumps were to be allotted.
(v) Information regarding the cancellation of the scheme for allotment of
petrol pumps.
(vi) Information regarding certification of life long disabled.
5. It is noted that his application had been forwarded by the Army
Headquarters to the Army Placement Agency on 21.03.2007 and the CPIO
concerned replied to him on 23.04.2007 giving information on each count.
During hearing, all the items of information were discussed in detail and the
adequacy or otherwise of the information provided was also examined at length.
With regard to the reasons as to why the Appellant had not been informed in time
about the jobs offered by the Indian Railways for the dependents of disabled
soldiers of the Kargil War, it was noted that the last date for filing application
with the Indian Railways had been originally fixed in May 2001 which was
extended, from time to time, by the Railways later and the Appellant was not
informed at that time as he was still in employment. After he was boarded out in
November that year, the authorities could have informed him about the jobs as
the last date had been extended beyond this period. The Respondents could not
give a very satisfactory explanation why he was not informed after his discharge
from the Army service and submitted that the frequent extensions of the last date
for receiving applications and the fact that the Appellant was still in service
during much of this period were probably responsible for this lapse.
DECISION
6. It was noted that the rest of the information provided to the Appellant in
response to his request were adequate. Since the scheme of allotment of 50 petrol
pumps to the disabled soldiers with a certain percentage of disability was
cancelled by the Ministry of Petroleum itself, the reply of the Public Authority in
this regard was found to be adequate and based on facts.
7. After detailed consideration of the submissions of the Appellant and the
Respondents, we feel that though most of the information sought has already
been given, nevertheless, the First Appellate Authority may, within 10 working
days from the date of the receipt of this order provide to the Appellant specific
information on the priority, if any, available to the children of the Appellant in
admission to various schools run by the Indian Army or by the Government of
India and also the specific facilities available to the children of such soldiers in
perusing studies in schools with compliance reported to the Commission.
8. The Appeal is, thus, disposed off. Copies of this order be given free of cost
to the parties.
Sd/-
(Satyananda Mishra)
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.
Sd/-
(Vijay Bhalla)
Assistant Registrar