Appellant sought details of tenure of his employment with Indian Rare Earths Ltd. & the date when BARC absorbed him - CIC: The PIO ought to have shared the information as placed now before the Commission, with the appellant in first place
Date of Hearing : 18.02.2016
Date of Decision : 21.03.2016
The appellant sought details of tenure of his employment with Indian Rare Earths Ltd. and the date when BARC absorbed him
Background of the case:
The appellant vide RTI application dated 23.06.2014 sought the above mentioned information. Vide reply dated 23.07.2014, CPIO informed the appellant that the information sought is not readily available. The appellant preferred first appeal, however, the FAA upheld the version of CPIO. Feeling aggrieved, the appellant approached the Commission.
Relevant facts emerging during hearing:
Both parties are present and heard. Shri Amberkar, learned Counsel for the appellant, states that the appellant remained in regular service of Indian Rare Earths Ltd. from 1958 to 20.02.1969 and thereafter, the appellant was absorbed by Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (hereinafter BARC). He states that the information was sought as BARC did not take into account the tenure of service with Indian Rare Earths, while determining the service benefits. Per contra, the CPIO submits that the claims raised by the appellant could not be verified as the information sought pertains to year 1958-1969. He draws the attention of the Commission towards the relevant part of written submission placed before the Commission, which is reproduced hereinafter:
“One of the units of M/s Indian Rare Earths Limited was in the BARC campus and the appellant claims that he was working with IREL. No such information is available in our records. We do not find anywhere the name of the appellant in our records. During the year 2005 our IREL unit in BARC was closed and 63 Nos. of employees were re-deployed in BARC on 01.04.2005. We have verified the list of those employees and we could not find the name of the appellant in that list. Copy of the list of those employees is enclosed for your kind reference please.”
After hearing parties and perusal of record, the Commission notes that the CPIO ought to have shared the information as placed now before the Commission, with the appellant in first place. The CPIO is directed to furnish a revised reply to the appellant, certifying the factual position as placed before the Commission with 2 weeks of receipt of this order. The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Citation: Shri Tukaram S Sanap v. Indian Rare Earths Ltd., in F. No.CIC/CC/A/2015/001717