Information regarding her interview taken by Gateway Terminal of India Company was sought by a Project affected person - PIO: GTIPL is a private organization that it is working with the respondent authority on PPP basis - CIC: Denial of information upheld
The appellant had sought information regarding her interview taken by Gateway Terminal of India Company (GTI) and assurance of job given by the concerned authorities in respect to the interview taken by GTI.
Relevant facts emerging during hearing:
Both parties are present. The appellant filed RTI application dt. 15.09.2009 seeking the above information. The APIO/Mgr.(Admn.) forwarded the RTI application to the GM(HR), GTI Pvt. Ltd. to provide information related to interviews taken by the GTI. The CM (Admn.) & Secy./PIO his reply dt. 27.01.2010 intimated the appellant that GTIPL is a private organisation and that the same does not come under the purview of RTI Act. The FAA in his order found the reply of the CPIO adequate. The appellant stated that she is a Project Affected Person (PAP) and on 29.05.2006, an interview was taken by GTI and she, along with five others, was selected and assured that a job will be given to them, but till date no job has been given. The appellant further stated that others, who were not project affected, were given jobs. The respondent reiterated his stand and stated that GTIPL is a private organization that it is working with the respondent authority on PPP basis. They do not have any kind of control or access to GTIPL’s recruitment process. He apprised the Commission of the fact that as per the license agreement between JNPT & GTIPL, Clause 9.6 specifically mentions that while employment of persons, preference shall be given to JNPT Project Affected Persons, to the extent qualified. He stated that the bio-data of the appellant has been forwarded to GTIPL only on humanitarian grounds, however, the same cannot be considered as assurance that a job will be given to her.
After hearing both the parties, the Commission concurs with the respondent authority’s view. No further action needs to be taken in this matter. The appeal is accordingly disposed of.
Citation: Smt. Rachna Damodar Koli v. Jawaharlal Nehru Port Trust in F.No.CIC/SS/A/2013/000248-YA