A retired employee sought information about his dues - CIC directed the appellant to visit the university to settle the problem - CIC: Hemwati Nandan Bahuguna Garhwal University directed to pay Rs. 3000/ to appellant for his conveyance to visit University
1. Appellant is present. PIO represents Public authority.
2. The Commission vide order dated 17.12.2015 held as under :
“ 5. The Commission having heard the submissions and perused the record, finds that the appellant, who is a retired employee, and who had submitted his bills way back in 1998 itself, could not get any relief/information so far about the same from the respondent authority. He was made to suffer for no fault of his. The appellant was so prompt that he immediately cleared the dues to the university, without waiting for the payment which he had to receive from the university. The Commission also finds that the Director (Sports) Mr. C.P. Singh had deliberately delayed the payment of dues to the appellant nor did he chose to comply with the FAA order dated within the prescribed period. When the appellant had already cleared the dues to the university, more than one year back, Mr. C.P. Singh is raising the said dues from the appellant after he received the CIC hearing notice. The Commission, therefore, considers this as a fit case to impose penalty on the CPIO/ Director (Sports) and award compensation to the appellant.
6. The Commission directs the Director (Sports) Mr. C.P.Singh (as deemed PIO) and the CPIO(University) Mr. Y.S. Paswan to show cause why maximum penalty should not be imposed on them for not furnishing the information within the prescribed period. Their explanation should reach the Commission within 21 days from the date of receipt of this order. The Commission also awards Rs.50,000/as compensation to the appellant for the hardship he was made to undergo in getting the information about his dues, and directs the Respondent authority to pay Rs. 50,000/ within one month from the date of receipt of this order. This compensation to be paid to the appellant should be over and above the dues of Rs. 80,000/ which the appellant had been pursuing with the university since 1998.
7. The Commission further directs the CPIO to furnish the latest action taken information to the appellant about the payment of the bills raised by him, within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order.
8. The Commission further recommends the Vice Chancellor of the University, to consider this RTI application as complaint and recommend taking disciplinary action against Mr. C. P. Singh, Director (Sports). The Commission also recommends the Vice Chancellor to look into these issues of bad governance and consider a prompt mechanism of responding to such complaints as reflected in the RTI application.”
3. Officer from the respondent authority stated that appellant is supposed to deposit the amount to the university which is due to be paid by him. He had to settle the advance of Rs. 6,62,180/, and after the settlement of the advances, the university had to pay Rs. 20,603/ to the appellant. PIO stated that university had requested the appellant to clear the debt several times, but he did not do it, because of which there was delay to settle the conflict. As the appellant himself was supposed to pay huge amount to the university, the PIO pleaded for withdrawal of compensation imposed upon the university. The CPIO also submitted before the Commission that huge advance was not settled by Dr. J. S. Bisht for a long time, but after the RTI application last payment of Rs. 11,432/ was made to the appellant. After the order of the CIC, appellant was called and the issue was settled. On the other hand the appellant stated that still there are many dues to be settled.
4. Having heard the submissions, and perused the records, the Commission directs the appellant to visit to the university on 4th April, 2016 at 1200 hours, as agreed by both the parties, to settle the problem and submit compliance report to the Commission. The Commission directs respondent authority to pay Rs. 3000/ to the appellant for his conveyance to visit Hemwati Nandan Bahuguna Garhwal University. The Commission directs respondent authority to submit compliance report with due acknowledgement of the appellant reflecting final decision of the matter. The Commission orders accordingly.
(M. Sridhar Acharyulu)
Citation: Jagdish Singh Bisht v. Hemwati Nandan Bahuguna Garhwal University, Pauri Garhwal in Case No.CIC/CC/A/2014/001514SA