Part information regarding vacancies for the post of MATE SS was not provided - Complainant did not wish to pursue the matter or press any action against the Respondent office - CIC expressed serious displeasure over the conduct of the then & present PIO
The Complainant sought information regarding number of vacancies for the post of MATE SS during the year 2012-13, number of the these vacancies reserved for compassionate appointments and marks obtained by him in the exam conducted in the year 2013 for the same post.
Grounds for the Complaint:
The CPIO has not provided the desired information.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Complainant: Present on phone.
Respondent: C.S. Khare, AO II, CRO (O), Delhi Cantt. and Nb/Sub Taimoor Beg, HQ Commander Works Engineer, MES, PIN-900450, C/o 56 APO representatives of CPIO present in person.
Complainant stated that although his grievance has not been settled, he does not wish to pursue the matter or press any action against the Respondent office.
Representative of the CPIO submitted that appropriate reply has been provided to the Complainant.
Further written submissions of the CPIO, Col. Ashutosh Yadav state that since the Complainant was at a lower position of merit in his category, he was not selected and the Respondent office is not in a position to offer appointment to him in any way.
Commission observes from the reply of the then CPIO dated 27.02.2016 that the same is incomplete as no information has been provided on query no.1 & 2 of the RTI Application. The then CPIO has remained silent on these points and the same is not understood. This amounts to deemed refusal to provide the complete information. The present CPIO is also reiterating the information provided on the marks secured by the Complainant which was sought vide query no.3 of the RTI Application. It appears that both the CPIOs have not applied their mind while perusing the contents of the RTI Application. CPIO cannot provide reply on queries of the RTI Application selectively. It may also be noted with regard to the present CPIO’s submission regarding being unable to provide appointment to the Complainant is immaterial to the proceedings under RTI Act before the Commission.
It is also observed that the relief sought under the said Complaint seeks information but the Complainant has not exhausted the provision of filing First Appeal.
Commission expresses serious displeasure over the conduct of the then and present CPIO in not having perused the RTI Application carefully and for providing incomplete information to the Complainant.
With these observations and in view of the prayer of the Complainant, Commission closes the case.
(Divya Prakash Sinha)