CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2010/002045/9286
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/002045
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Mrs. Nasir Bibi
E-2150, JJ Colony,
Bawana, Delhi – 110039.
Respondent : Mrs. Asha Gandhi
Public Information Officer &
District Welfare Officer (NW-I)
Social Welfare Department
Government of NCT of Delhi
Premises of the School for the Deaf and Dumb,
Sector-4, Rohini, Delhi.
RTI application filed on : 02/04/2010 PIO replied : 09/05/2010 First appeal filed on : Unclear First Appellate Authority order : 22/07/2010 Second Appeal received on : 16/07/2010 S. No Information Sought Reply of the PIO
1. What actions have been taken by the various officials on The application has been rejected as
the application sent by the appellant regarding the Old Age
the appellant has not enclosed any
pension/ Widow pension/ Handicap pension? Which certificate showing that he has
official was assigned the application? resided in Delhi for more than 5
years.
2. The names, post and details of the officers who faltered The application has been rejected,
and due to whom, the appellant has not received his hence not applicable.
pension
3. After depositing the application, in how many days is any Unclear in reply.
action taken on it according to the rules?
4. The appellant has been informed that his application is not Unclear in reply.
there on the computer in the department. Is the hard copy
there with the department or has it been lost?
5. Has the appellant’s pension application been rejected? If The application has been rejected.
yes, then the names and details of the official who rejected No further information regarding the
it and the reasons for rejection should be intimated. Has the same can be given by this office.
appellant been informed about the rejection? If not, then
why?
6. After depositing the application on 18/09/2007, have any No guidelines have been issued by
efforts been made to contact the appellant? If not, then the department regarding the same.
why?
Page 1 of 2
7. The status of the appellant’s pension application. When Unclear in reply
will he receive his pension and on what date if his
application has been approved?
8. Where is it mentioned in the rules that in order to be Unclear in reply.
eligible for pension application an applicant has to have
lived in Delhi for five years? Is it even mentioned or not?
Grounds for the First Appeal:
The appellant claims that he has bribe of Rs.200/- to the inquiry officer who had ensured that she
would get a card. Unsatisfactory information provided by the PIO
Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
Appeal dismissed by the FAA and appellant directed to file a fresh application for pension.
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
The appellant claims that she has attached proof of staying in Delhi for over five years
Unsatisfactory information provided by the PIO and Dismissal of Appeal by the FAA.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant: Absent;
Respondent: Dr. Rachna Bhardwaj, Welfare Officer on behalf of Mrs. Asha Gandhi, Public
Information Officer & District Welfare Officer (NW-);
The respondent states that the pension claims of the appellant have been rejected as the proof of
residence for five years have not been attached with the original application. She also states that at the
time of first appeal the appellant was given another form and asked to fill this up and give it with all the
enclosures. However the appellant has not done this. The information appears to have been provided.
Decision:
The Appeal is dismissed.
This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
Any information in compliance with this Order will be provided free of cost as per Section 7(6) of RTI Act.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
08 September 2010
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(YM)
Page 2 of 2