CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2011/001280/13262
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/001280
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Ms. Seema Rani,
R/o Plot No. 48-49, Pocket G-4,
Sector-11, Rohini,
Delhi – 110085
Respondent : Mr. V. K. Bansal
Public Information Officer & Dy. Secretary
Delhi Subordinate Service Selection Board
(DSSSB), GNCTD,
Karkardooma, Shahdara,
New Delhi- 110092.
RTI application filed on : 25/02/2011 PIO replied : 17/03/2011 First appeal filed on : 22/03/2011 First Appellate Authority order : 21/04/2011 Second Appeal received on : 11/05/2011 Information sought by the appellant:
The information which is sought is with reference to the Advertisement No. 02/2008, Post code No.
16/2008, Post name teacher (Primary) MCD, Roll No. 01611490. Kindly provide the following
information/copies of documents under RTI 2005:-
1) The action initiated by the DSSSB after receiving the file pertaining to the applicant’s appointment
from the Law and Justice department, GNCTD through Services department GNCTD on 28.01.2011.
2) Provide/supply photocopy of the noting and the correspondence portion of the file wherein such
action after 28.01.2011 was initiated.
3) If no action has been initiated till date, then the reasons for the same.
4) Name of the officer/official along with their designation with whom the file is lying without any
action.
5) Whether the file pertaining to my appointment received from the law and justice Department,
GNCTD through services department, GNCTD on 28.01.2011 has been put up before the secretary
and the chairman of DSSSB. If so, specify the date of submission of the file before the secretary and
chairman of the DSSSB.
6) if the answer is no with regard to Point No. 5, then, the name of the officer/ official along with their
designation who is responsible for the same.
Reply of the PIO:
File, relating to the compliance order of PGC, which was received in the board back from L&J
department on 25.01.2011, is under submission and no final decision has been taken in this regard, as
such information/documents as sought cannot be supplied at present.
Ground of the First Appeal:
The information provided by the PIO is incomplete. The information was sought on “action initiated”
whereas CPIO refused to provide the information on the ground that “no final decision has been taken
in this regard”. There has been a failure on part of PIO to give due consideration to his application.
Despite the availability of the demanded information, the same has not been given rather a vague and
evasive reply has been given.
Order of the FAA:
The PIO is directed to provide the information to the appellant within 10 working days. Appeal is
disposed off.
Ground of the Second Appeal:
Even after the passage of ten days, the requisite information has not been provided. Thus, PIO has
failed to honor the direction of the Hon. FAA and has willfully disobeyed the provisions of the RTI
Act.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant: Absent;
Respondent: Mr. V. K. Bansal, Public Information Officer & Dy. Secretary;
The PIO shows that he has provided the information to the Appellant as per the order of the
FAA on 11/05/2011.
Decision:
The Appeal is disposed.
Information available on the records appears to have been provided.
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
05 July 2011
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (AA)