Central Information Commission
2nd Floor, August Kranti Bhawan,
Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi - 110 066
Website: www.cic.gov.in
Decision No.5258/IC(A)/2010
F. Nos.CIC/MA/A/2010/000222, CIC/MA/C/2010/000033
CIC/MA/C/2010/000095, CIC/MA/C/2010/000098
CIC/MA/C/2010/000103
Dated, the 31st March, 2010
Name of the Appellant: Smt. Prabha Rani
Name of the Public Authority: 1. O/o The Development Commissioner (H),
Kolkata
2. O/o the Development Commissioner (H),
Delhi
3. Regional Pay & Accounts Office, Deptt of
Textiles
i
Facts
:
1. The appellant has grievances regarding service matters mainly, ACP and
grant of VRS. In this context, she has asked for certain information through
different RTI applications. Being dissatisfied with the PIO’s response, she has
submitted 5 separate appeals and complaints before the Commission and
pleaded for providing complete information.
2. On perusal of the documents submitted by the appellant it is observed that
she has asked for information in the form of various queries. The CPIO has
replied and furnished the information on the basis of available records, which is,
however, not satisfactory, as alleged by the complainant.
Decision:
3. An information seeker is expected to ask for information as per section 2(f)
and (j) of the Act. A requester should not make attempts to elicit views and
opinion of the PIO, through various forms of queries, as has been attempted in
the instant appeals. The appellant is accordingly advised to seek inspection of
the relevant records and files so as to clearly identify and specify the information,
which should be furnished as per the provisions of the Act.
i
“If you don’t ask, you don’t get.” – Mahatma Gandhi
1
4. Both the parties should mutually decide a convenient date and time for
inspection of the relevant documents within 15 days from the date of receipt of
this decision.
5. As there is no denial of information u/s 8(1) of the Act and that there are
no provisions under the Act for redressal of grievances of the employees, the
complaints before the Commission, in the garb of seeking information, are
considered unnecessary. The appellant is advised to seek legal remedy in the
matter.
6. With these observations, all the aforementioned petitions 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. Smt. Prabha Rani, C/o Dr. Udaya Bhattacharya, Lal Bagh, PO/Dist:
Darbhanga-846 004, Bihar.
2. Sh. S.P. Moitra, Deputy Director (H) & PIO, O/o the Development
Commissioner (H), Eastern Regional Office, CGO Complex, 3rd floor, a-
Wing, DF-Block, Salt Lake, Kolkata – 700 064.
3. Sh. Sanjay Agrawal, CPIO, O/o the Development Commissioner (H), West
Block No.7, R.K. Puram, New Delhi – 110 066.
4. The PIO & Sr. Accounts Officer, Regional Pay & Accounts Office,
Department of Textiles, 1 Council Street, Kolkata – 700 001.
ii
“All men by nature desire to know.” – Aristotle
2