Reasons for non payment of 20% amount for the 111 towers erected by him - APIO: balance 20% is released only after the inspection unit of BSNL certifies that the work is complete - CIC: inform the names of inspecting officers expeditiously
15 Nov, 2013Information about Towers Erection work by a Contractor Company - Appellant: 111 towers erected by him for which 20% payment is held up and he wants to know the reason – APIO: balance 20% is released only after the inspection unit of BSNL certifies that the work is complete in all respect - APIO: full payment has been released for 60 towers and the contractor is liable to facilitate the ATU officers in the inspection of the remaining towers - Appellant: BSNL has been repeatedly requested to inform the name(s) of the officer(s) who will carry out the inspection but no response has been received – APIO: the matter will be discussed with his superiors and the appellant shall be informed of the name(s) of the inspecting officer(s) expeditiously - CIC: inform the names of officers
The appellant had sought following information about Towers Erection work by a Contractor Company M/s Sanjay Engineering Industries from 01/04/2007:
(a) Date of Order of Tower Erection.
(b) Date on which tower materials was taken from department warehouse by the contractor.
(c) Date of completion of tower erection work.
(d) Date of payment of 80% of the bill of tower erection work.
(e) Date on which A.T. was done.
(f) Date of installation of equipment and antenna on the towers.
(g) Date of AT done of tower in working condition.
(h) Date on which the tower has been started working commercially.
(i) Date on which the tower was handed over to SSA.
Grounds for the Second Appeal: The PIO has not given the desired information.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing: The following were present
Appellant: Mr. Sanjay Garg through TC (M): 9829157043
Respondent: Mr. R P Goel APIO through VC
The appellant stated that he has erected 111 towers and in each case he holds a certificate issued by the DE confirming that the work is complete but still his 20% payment is held up and he wants to know the reason. The APIO clarified that 80% payment is released based on the DE’s certificate and the balance 20% is released only after the inspection unit certifies that the work is complete in all respects. He further stated that in the appellant’s case 100% payment has been released for 60 towers and the contractor is liable to facilitate the ATU officers in the inspection of the remaining towers. The appellant pleaded that he should be advised the name(s) of the officer(s) who will carry out the inspection as he has been writing repeatedly to the BSNL in the matter but no response has been received. The APIO stated that he will discuss the matter with his superiors and inform the appellant the name(s) of the inspecting officer(s) expeditiously. The appellant agreed.
Decision notice:
As stated by the APIO he should provide the information [viz. name(s) of the officer(s)] as above to the appellant within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
BASANT SETH
Information Commissioner
Citation: Mr. Sanjay Garg v. BSNL in File No. CIC/BS/A/2012/001615/3730