Rules for preparing the seniority list of industrial employees - PIO: After the technical problem of user ID was resolved on the online portal, the appellant was offered inspection as the information sought was huge and bulky - CIC: No intervention
The appellant has sought the following information:
1. What are the rules for preparing the seniority list of industrial employees. Provide a copy of all the rules.
2. Provide a copy of the complete list of marks obtained by those employees who were appointed in the year 2013 under CWE, Airforce Bikaner.
3. Provide a copy of the preliminary seniority list of the industrial employees who were appointed by CWE, Airforce Bikaner in the year 2013.
4. Provide copies of joining letter and medical fitness certificate of mate electrician who were appointed under CWE, Airforce Bikaner in the year 2013.
Grounds for filing Second Appeal:
The CPIO did not provide the desired information.
Submissions made by Appellant and Respondent during Hearing:
The appellant was not present to plead his case despite service of hearing notice on 28.02.2022 vide speed post acknowledgment No. ED038592585IN. However, in his second appeal he had stated that till date no reply has been provided to him.
The CPIO reiterated the contents of his written submissions dated 05.03.2022 wherein he has stated that the online RTI portal was not working during the period when the RTI application was filed and it was only in the month of Nov, 2020 that the technical problem of user ID was resolved and therefore on 25.11.2020, a prompt reply was given to the appellant whereby he was asked to inspect the records as the information sought was huge and bulky. The CPIO had further informed that no further correspondence was received from the appellant till date.
From a perusal of the relevant case records, it is noted that vide letter dated 25.11.2020, the appellant was provided an opportunity to inspect the records, however, as informed by the CPIO the appellant did not avail of such opportunity. The Commission is unable to find any flaw in the reply given. However, with regard to the issue of delay, the Commission accepts the submissions of the CPIO as the delay which was purely unintentional can cannot be attributed to the CPIO. Hence, the Commission is taking a lenient view in the matter.
In view of the above, the Commission upholds the submissions of the CPIO and does not find any scope for intervention in the matter.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Vanaja N. Sarna
Citation: Pramod Kumar v. Military Engineer Services in File No.:- CIC/MESER/A/2020/673047, Date of Decision : 11/03/2022