Central Information Commission
2nd Floor, August Kranti Bhawan,
Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi - 110 066
Website: www.cic.gov.in
Decision No.5240/IC(A)/2010
F. Nos.CIC/MA/A/2009/000980, CIC/MA/A/2010/000341,
CIC/MA/C/2010/000041, CIC/MA/C/2010/000131,
CIC/MA/C/2010/000132
Dated, the 25th March, 2010
Name of the Appellant: Shri. Sanjay Kumar Mishra
Name of the Public Authority: Damodar Valley Corporation
i
Facts
:
1. The appellant was heard through a representative on 22/3/2010. During
the hearing, the Commission made an effort to contact the appellant also on his
phone numbers on record. But, there was no response.
2. The appellant has frequently been putting up several appeals and
complaints before the Commission, even though there is no denial of information
to him. In our Decision No.3868/IC(A)/2009 dated 15th April 2009 he was
advised as under:
“4. The appellant is advised to prepare a comprehensive list of
required information and resubmit to the concerned PIO, who should
examine the disclosure of information within 15 working days from the
date of receipt of fresh application from the appellant. The appellant
should ensure that the information asked for is clearly specified as per
section 2(f) of the Act, which requires that the information should be
available in any material form”.
3. Inspite of this advice to the appellant, he has been seeking information in
the form of queries based on assumptions rather than actual occurrence of
events or the activities of the respondent. Our attempts to satisfy him in so far as
providing access to the relevant information, as maintained by the respondent,
has seemingly not yielded desirable results due to lack of cooperation from the
appellant who has certain grievances regarding service matters arising mainly
from his alleged illegal occupation of the staff quarters, as stated by the CPIO.
i
“If you don’t ask, you don’t get.” – Mahatma Gandhi
1
4. During the hearing, the CPIO stated that in the garb of seeking
information, the appellant is making attempts to harass the officials of the
respondent as he was not seeking information as per section 2(f) and (j) of the
Act.
5. The PIO also stated that he was willing to cooperate with the appellant to
allow access to the documents including inspection of records so as to satisfy the
information needs of the appellant.
Decision:
6. As assured by the CPIO, he should allow inspection of the relevant
records and files so as to enable the appellant to clearly specify the information
as per section 2(f) of the Act. Upon inspection, the specified information should
be furnished to him. Both the parties should mutually decide a convenient date
and time for inspection of the records within 15 working days from the date of
issue of this decision.
7. The appellant is advised again to refrain from putting up numerous
frivolous appeals and raising issues relating to redressal of grievances of
employees/customers of the respondent.
8. With these observations, all the appeals are disposed of.
Sd/-
(Prof. M.M. Ansari)
Central Information Commissioner ii
Authenticated true copy:
(M.C. Sharma)
Deputy Registrar
Name & address of Parties:
1. Sh. S.K. Mishra, Janta Nagar, Bokaro Thermal, Dist: Bokaro – 829 107
2. Sh. A.K. Sharma, CPIO, Damodar Valley Corporation, DVC Tower, VIP
Road, Kolkata – 700 054.
3. The Appellate Authority, Damodar Valley Corporation, DVC Tower, VIP
Road, Kolkata – 700 054.
ii
“All men by nature desire to know.” – Aristotle
2