CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Appeal No.CIC/WB/A/2007/00975 dated 24.9.2007
Right to Information Act 2005 - Section 19
Appellant - Shri Shaileshchandra Chatrabhuj Parmar
Respondent - Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA)
Facts
:
By an application of 3.4.07 Shri Shaileshchandra Chatrabhuj Parmar, UDC,
SIB Ahmedabad applied to the Jt. Director Ahmedabad seeking information
regarding the decision on his representations of 26.4.05 and 21.11.05 addressed
to the President of India, on regularization of his services with retrospective
effect, together with consequent promotional benefits. After going through the
usual procedure of response and appeal, the case was listed for hearing on
5.12.08 at 11.00 a.m. through video conference.
In response to our appeal notice, Addl. Dy. Director IB brought to our notice
that this matter had already been decided upon in our decision of 10.9.08 in
Appeal No. CIC/WB/A/2007/00773; Shri Shaileshchandra Chatrabhuj Parmar
vs. Ministry of Home Affairs. In this case our decision was as follows:
“Section 24(1) of the RTI Act, 2005 is clear in the matter before us,
and reads as follows:
“Sec. 24(1)
Nothing contained in this Act shall apply to the intelligence and
security organizations specified in the Second Schedule, being
organizations established by the Central Government or any
information furnished by such organizations to that Government:
Provided that the information pertaining to the allegations of
corruption and human rights violations shall not be excluded under
this sub-section:
Provided further that in the case of information sought for is in
respect of allegations of violation of human rights, the information
shall only be provided after the approval of the Central Information
Commission, and notwithstanding anything contained in section 7,1
such information shall be provided within forty-five days from the
date of the receipt of request.”
The Intelligence Bureau is listed at Sr. No. 1 of the Second
Schedule of this Act. The present appeal only addresses the issue
of disposal of petitions addressed by appellant Shri Parmar to the
President of India. There is no allegation as would call for activation
of the Provisos to the Act. This application, therefore, clearly lies
outside the jurisdiction of this Commission, which can adjudicate
only such matters that fall within the purview of the Right to
Information Act, 2005, which the IB does not, except under the
Provisos mentioned. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed.”
DECISION NOTICE
The present case is, therefore, a case of duplication and no further decision is
required in the matter by us. This case is now closed.
Announced on this 16th day of December, 2008 in the open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
(Wajahat Habibullah)
Chief Information Commissioner
16.12.2008
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.
(LC Singhi)
Registrar
16.12.2008
2