{"id":271755,"date":"2009-03-02T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-03-01T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-k-m-naregal-vs-department-of-personnel-on-2-march-2009"},"modified":"2017-04-12T02:32:45","modified_gmt":"2017-04-11T21:02:45","slug":"shri-k-m-naregal-vs-department-of-personnel-on-2-march-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-k-m-naregal-vs-department-of-personnel-on-2-march-2009","title":{"rendered":"Shri K. M. Naregal vs Department Of Personnel & … on 2 March, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Central Information Commission<\/div>\n
Shri K. M. Naregal vs Department Of Personnel & … on 2 March, 2009<\/div>\n
                       CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION\n                         Appeal No.CIC\/WB\/A\/2007\/00825 dated 18.8.2007\n                           Right to Information Act<\/a> 2005 - Section 19\n\n\nAppellant      -          Shri K. M. Naregal\nRespondent         -      Department of Personnel & Training (DoPT)\n\n\nFacts<\/pre>\n
:\n<\/p>\n
     By an application of 11.1.07 Shri K. M. Naregal of Swami Vivekanand
\nCollege, Kolhapur, Maharashtra applied to CPIO, DoPT seeking the following
\ninformation:\n<\/p>\n
   1. “Whether the IFS Sr. Scale (ii) Jr. Adm. Grade (non functional) of
\n      1.1.1986 and 1.1.1996 are the corresponding pay scales of the post
\n      held by a pre 1986 retiree with more than 9 years service in IFS
\n      cadre drawing his pay in the IFS Sr. Scale (a) Time scale of
\n      1.1.1973 like me and if so whether those pay scales can be
\n      adopted to revise the pension of such pre 1986 retiree under the
\n      provisions of pension Revision orders of 10.2.1995 and 17.12.1998
\n      and if not what are the reasons?\n<\/p>\n
   2. Both the pay Revision Notifications of 13.3.1987 and 17.10.1997
\n      have prescribed the Jr. Adm. Grade as “non-functional” in Sr. Scale\n<\/p>\n
      (ii) and the placement in Sr. Scale (ii) from SR. Scale (i) is solely
\n      subject to completion of nine years service in the IFS cadre and is
\n      made automatic and the Regulations framed for absorption of an
\n      officer in the Jr. adm. Grade are not made operational for such
\n      placement. In such a situation is it correct to assume that Jr. Adm.
\n      Grade is made applicable to IFS only w.e.f. 3.3.1988 and with such
\n      assumption is it correct to deny the benefits of Sr. Scale (ii) to
\n      revise the pension of pre 1986 retirees like myself even when that
\n      pay scale corresponds to the pay scale of the post held by such pre
\n      1986 retiree like my self and even when the OM of 10.2.1998 has
\n      not excluded any corresponding pay scale on the basis of the
\n      specification, status or character of such pay scale for revising the
\n      pension of pre 1986 retiree?\n<\/p>\n
   3. The OM of 10.2.1998 has not provided on any excuse or under any
\n      circumstances to adopt a lower pay scale than the corresponding
\n      pay scale of the post last held by the pre 1986 retiree like myself
\n      based on the wrongly assumed status of the scale as Jr. Adm.
\n      Grade. The head of my Dept. revised my pension by adopting the
\n      lower SR. Scale (i) pay scale instead of the corresponding pay of
\n      Sr. Scale (ii) and thus has obliged me to loose nearly Rs. 1000\/- pm
\n      in my basis pension fulfill the letter and spirit of the OM of<\/p>\n
                                               1<\/span>
\n       10.2.1998 and if not how does the Government compensate the
\n      loss suffered by me in my old age in payment of arrears of my
\n      legitimate full pension and loss of interest?\n<\/p>\n
   4. I am a central Govt. Pensioner. I am in the All India Services
\n      allocated and lending my services to Maharashtra Govt. Hence
\n      ultimate responsibility to see that my pension is revised as per
\n      Govt. orders rests with the Govt. of India. The head of my Dept
\n      indulged in the bizarre acts of disowning his own commitment and
\n      damaged my interests by misleading the appellate authority with
\n      false information after defying legitimate instructions of Lok Ayukta
\n      as explained in para III D (a) to D(h) of this application. Can the
\n      Govt. of India remain as a silent spectator when my interests are
\n      being demolished by the head of my Dept who borrowed my
\n      service from Govt. of India particularly when Govt. of India was
\n      made Res. No. 1 in my appeal? IS it not the responsibility of the
\n      Central Govt to take remedial measures to restore the illegal
\n      damages caused to my interests and the harassment caused to me
\n      since last seven years?\n<\/p>\n
   5. Kindly obtain and send to me the pay scale of Jr. Scale of IFS
\n      meant for direct recruits with 1 up to 4 years service in IFS cadre
\n      prevailing on 1.1.1973 along with a copy of Govt. Notification
\n      sanctioning such pay scale. I very earnestly request the Public
\n      Information Officer to kindly obtain information separately for each
\n      of the give quarries made above.”\n<\/p>\n
     To this he received a response of 27.2.2007 informing the applicant that he
\nhad not attached an application fee.     Upon this Shri Naregal moved a First
\nAppeal before Shri M.P.Singh, Director & First Appellate Authority on 30.4.07
\nstating that he had paid the fees but had not received response, as follows:\n<\/p>\n
      “Receipt of this application was acknowledged by the PIO on
\n      15.1.2007. however I was asked to send the application fee of Rs.
\n      10\/- by demand draft in his letter F. No. 29018\/6\/2007 AIS II Dated
\n      27.2.2007 (copy enclosed). This letter was posted on 3.6.2007 and
\n      was received by me on 10.3.2007. Accordingly I forwarded the
\n      Demand Draft No. 73779 of 10.3.2007 to that authority by Regd.
\n      Post on 10.3.2007 receipt of which is acknowledge on 13.3.2007.
\n      However he has not furnished the information sought for till this day
\n      even though the period specified under subsection (1) of section 7<\/a>
\n      has expired.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                                        2<\/span><\/p>\n
      In response to this Shri M. P. Singh, Director, Dep’t. of Pension and
\nPensioners’ Welfare, Ministry of Personnel Public Grievances & Pensions, in his
\norder of 9.5.07 advised as follows:\n<\/p>\n
      “I am passing this appeal to Shri Chaitanya Prasad, Director (S)
\n      Room No. …A, North block, New Delhi (Department of Personnel &
\n      Training) for appropriate decision. You may contact him for the
\n      disposal of your appeal as appellate authority.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     Consequently by his letter of 21.5.07 Shri Ramakant Singh, Section Office
\nof the DoPT informed appellant Sh. Naregal as follows:\n<\/p>\n
      “by queries 1, 2, 3 and 4 of para III regarding Information sought
\n      under Sec 6 (1) of RTI Act<\/a> 2005 of your letter dated 11.1.2007, you
\n      have sought opinion\/ clarification which do not come under the
\n      purview of Section 2<\/a> (f) of the RTI Act<\/a>. The definition of
\n      information, as it occurs in Section 2<\/a> (f) lays down the scope of the
\n      type of information a petitioner can seek. The underlined idea is
\n      clearly that the petitioner’s entitlement for information is only in
\n      respect of the categories of information mentioned in Section 2<\/a> (f).
\n      It is not opened to a petitioner to ask, in the guise of seeking
\n      information, questions to the public authorities about the nature and
\n      quality of their action. In view of the position, the opinion\/
\n      clarification asked for by queries 1, 2, 3 and 4 cannot be given.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     In the meantime Shri Naregal had moved a first appeal addressed to
\nDirector (S) DoPT on 21.5.07, consequent to which, by a letter of 4.6.07, he
\nreceived a call for hearing. On 17.6.07 Shri Naregal submitted a representation
\nto the First Appellate Authority Shri Chaitanya Prasad, Director (Services)
\nchallenging the contents of the letter received from Shri Ramakant Singh,
\nSection Officer in the letter of 21.5.07. Subsequently, however, in his order of
\n21.6.07 Shri Chaitanya Prasad Director (S) has held as follows:\n<\/p>\n
      “Now, therefore, the undersigned as Appellate Authority dispose of
\n      the appeal filed by Shri K. M. Naregal, IFS (Retd) u\/s 19 (3) of the
\n      RTI Act<\/a> 2005 with the following observations:-\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      Central Information Commission, in its judgment dated 21.4.2006
\n      (F. No. CIC\/AT\/A\/2006\/00045) in another appeal, has stated that
\n      the definition of information as it occurs in Section 2<\/a> (f), lays down
\n      the scope of the type of information a petitioner can seek. The
\n      underlined idea is clearly that the petitioner’s entitlement for
\n      information is only in respect of the categories of information<\/p>\n
                                        3<\/span>
\n       mentioned in Section 2<\/a> (f). It is not opened to a petitioner to ask, in
\n      the guise of seeking information, questions to the public authorities
\n      about the nature and quality of their action. The RTI Act<\/a> does not
\n      cast on the public authority any obligation to answer queries, in
\n      which a petitioner attempt to elicit answers to his questions with
\n      prefixes, such as, why, what, when and whether. The petitioner’s
\n      right extends only to seeking information, as defined in Section 2<\/a> (f)
\n      either by pinpointing the file, document, paper or record, etc., or by
\n      mentioning the type of information as may be available with the
\n      specified public authority.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      In light of the interpretations by the Central Information Commission
\n      as mentioned above, the reply sent by Shri Rama Kant Singh,
\n      Section Officer, AIS-II to the appellant vide letter No. 29018\/6\/2007-
\n      AIS (II) dated 21.5.2007 is in order and as per the provisions of RTI
\n      Act<\/a>.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Appellant’s prayer before us in his second appeal is as below:\n<\/p>\n
      “The appellate authority in his capacity as a public authority is
\n      duty bound to take cognizance of such wrong action of the
\n      head of my Dept and to take remedial measures to amend the
\n      wrong action u\/s 4 (1) (c ) of the RTI Act<\/a>, 2005 in the interest of
\n      honest implementation of government decision. Hence the
\n      action of appellate authority in rejecting to supply the
\n      information sought by me in the queries 1, 2, 3 and 4 of my
\n      application dated 11.1.2007 by taking shelter under the
\n      definition of the term “Information” u\/s 2 (f) of the RTI Act<\/a> 2005
\n      is wrong. Therefore I earnestly request the Hon’ble
\n      Commission to instruct the appellate authority to supply all
\n      the information sought in my original application dated
\n      11.1.2007 under queries 1, 2, 3 and 4.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     The appeal was scheduled for hearing on 2.3.2009. The following are
\npresent:\n<\/p>\n
      Respondents
\n           Ms. Harjot Kaur Bamhrah, Director (Services)
\n           Shri G. C. Pandey, U.S. (AIS-III), CPIO<\/p>\n
     Although arrangements were made for videoconference with NIC Mumbai,
\nappellant Shri Naregal has opted not to be present.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                              DECISION NOTICE<\/p>\n
                                        4<\/span>
\n       The plea of Shri Naregal, in his second appeal before us, as clarified by
\nhim in his application of 17.7.’07, is complaint of what he considers “great
\ninjustice” and has in fact stated that he wishes to ” combat such injustice by
\nobtaining authentic information regarding correct interpretation of orders from the
\nDep’t” with regard to pension revision orders. Interpretation of laws, rules &
\norders is not within the purview of the RTI Act<\/a> and, therefore, the competence of
\nthe CPIO. This is a matter of legal opinion, required to be agitated before the
\ncompetent Court. The appeal under the RTI Act<\/a> is, therefore, unsustainable
\nand is, therefore, dismissed.\n<\/p>\n
      We, however, notice that there was undue delay in responding to the RTI
\napplication. Also the first appeal seems to have initially been disposed of by a
\nSection Officer whereas Sec 19(1) requires that this be dealt with at the level of
\nan “officer senior in rank to the CPIO.” Although we do not propose penalty u\/s
\n20(1) because the application lies outside the purview of the RTI Act<\/a>, CPIO Shri
\nG. C. Pandey and appellate authority are cautioned to ensure that any
\napplication received under the RTI law must be responded to within the
\ntime frame and in the manner mandated by that law even if this is only to
\nreject admissibility under the law, lest the Department open itself to claims for
\ncompensation.\n<\/p>\n
      Announced in the hearing. Notice of this decision be given free of cost to
\nthe parties.\n<\/p>\n
(Wajahat Habibullah)
\nChief Information Commissioner
\n2.3.2009<\/p>\n
Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against
\napplication and payment of the charges, prescribed under the Act, to the CPIO
\nof this Commission.\n<\/p>\n
                                        5<\/span><\/p>\n
 (Pankaj Shreyaskar)
\nJoint Registrar
\n2.3.2009<\/p>\n
                      6<\/span>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Central Information Commission Shri K. M. Naregal vs Department Of Personnel & … on 2 March, 2009 CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION Appeal No.CIC\/WB\/A\/2007\/00825 dated 18.8.2007 Right to Information Act 2005 – Section 19 Appellant – Shri K. M. Naregal Respondent – Department of Personnel & Training (DoPT) Facts : By an application of 11.1.07 Shri K. […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[39,1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-271755","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-central-information-commission","category-judgements"],"yoast_head":"\nShri K. M. Naregal vs Department Of Personnel & ... on 2 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-k-m-naregal-vs-department-of-personnel-on-2-march-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Shri K. M. Naregal vs Department Of Personnel & ... on 2 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-k-m-naregal-vs-department-of-personnel-on-2-march-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-03-01T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-04-11T21:02:45+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-k-m-naregal-vs-department-of-personnel-on-2-march-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-k-m-naregal-vs-department-of-personnel-on-2-march-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Shri K. M. Naregal vs Department Of Personnel & … on 2 March, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-03-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-04-11T21:02:45+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-k-m-naregal-vs-department-of-personnel-on-2-march-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1789,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Central Information Commission\",\"Judgements\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-k-m-naregal-vs-department-of-personnel-on-2-march-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-k-m-naregal-vs-department-of-personnel-on-2-march-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-k-m-naregal-vs-department-of-personnel-on-2-march-2009\",\"name\":\"Shri K. M. Naregal vs Department Of Personnel & ... on 2 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-03-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-04-11T21:02:45+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-k-m-naregal-vs-department-of-personnel-on-2-march-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-k-m-naregal-vs-department-of-personnel-on-2-march-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-k-m-naregal-vs-department-of-personnel-on-2-march-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Shri K. M. Naregal vs Department Of Personnel & … on 2 March, 2009\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Shri K. M. Naregal vs Department Of Personnel & ... on 2 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-k-m-naregal-vs-department-of-personnel-on-2-march-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Shri K. M. Naregal vs Department Of Personnel & ... on 2 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-k-m-naregal-vs-department-of-personnel-on-2-march-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-03-01T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-04-11T21:02:45+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-k-m-naregal-vs-department-of-personnel-on-2-march-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-k-m-naregal-vs-department-of-personnel-on-2-march-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Shri K. M. Naregal vs Department Of Personnel & … on 2 March, 2009","datePublished":"2009-03-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-04-11T21:02:45+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-k-m-naregal-vs-department-of-personnel-on-2-march-2009"},"wordCount":1789,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Central Information Commission","Judgements"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-k-m-naregal-vs-department-of-personnel-on-2-march-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-k-m-naregal-vs-department-of-personnel-on-2-march-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-k-m-naregal-vs-department-of-personnel-on-2-march-2009","name":"Shri K. M. Naregal vs Department Of Personnel & ... on 2 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-03-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-04-11T21:02:45+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-k-m-naregal-vs-department-of-personnel-on-2-march-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-k-m-naregal-vs-department-of-personnel-on-2-march-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-k-m-naregal-vs-department-of-personnel-on-2-march-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Shri K. M. Naregal vs Department Of Personnel & … on 2 March, 2009"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/271755","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=271755"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/271755\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=271755"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=271755"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=271755"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}