Details regarding disciplinary proceedings against the appellant was sought vide multiple applications - PIO provided some information stating that information is very old - CIC: information as per available records has been provided; appeal dismissed

Information pertaining to disciplinary proceedings against the appellant was sought - PIO collected all information that was available from various sources and had sent a comprehensive reply stating information sought is very old, Regional Office was shifted & number of officers either retired or had been transferred during this period; Therefore it was practically not possible to compile the entire series of information sought for by the appellant - CIC: voluminous information pertaining to very old records was sought in order to defend himself against his removal from service; The respondents had provided information as per available records to the appellant; appeal dismissed 

ORDER

Case No: CIC/MP/A/2014/001150

1. The appellant, Shri Vivek Kumar Bhatnagar submitted RTI application dated 12.02.2014 before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. (OICL), Dehradun seeking information/documents pertaining to disciplinary proceedings initiated against him through 16 points. 1.2. The CPIO vide letter dated 1.4.2014 sent point-wise reply to the appellant. Dissatisfied with the reply of the CPIO, the appellant filed an appeal on 20.04.2014 before the first appellate authority (FAA). The FAA had not adjudicated on appellant’s first appeal.

1.3. Thereafter the appellant filed the instant appeal before the Commission.

Case No: CIC/MP/A/2014/001152

2. The appellant, Shri Vivek Kumar Bhatnagar submitted RTI application dated 19.02.2014 before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. (OICL), Dehradun seeking copy of chargesheet issued to Shri Om Sahai Bhatnagar, DO. OICL, Bijnor Branch and copies of vouchers in respect of amounts claimed by Shri J.L. Gupta, Branch Manager Nazibabad etc. through two

points.

2.1. The CPIO vide letter dated 1.4.2014 denied information on point 1 being third party information and on point 2 the appellant was informed that the relevant documents were not available. Dissatisfied with the reply of the CPIO, the appellant filed an appeal on 20.04.2014 before the first appellate authority (FAA). The FAA had not adjudicated on appellant’s first appeal.

2.2. Thereafter the appellant filed the instant appeal before the Commission.

Case No: CIC/MP/A/2014/001156

3. The appellant, Shri Vivek Kumar Bhatnagar submitted RTI application dated 11.02.2014 before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. (OICL), Dehradun seeking information/documents pertaining to disciplinary proceedings initiated against him through 11 points.

3.1. The CPIO vide letter dated 1.4.2014 denied information on points 1 to 9 being third party information under the provisions of Section 8(1)(j) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information: Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person. of the RTI Act; on points 10 and 11 the appellant was informed that the information sought was not specific. Dissatisfied with the reply of the CPIO, the appellant filed an appeal on 20.04.2014 before the first appellate authority (FAA). The FAA had not adjudicated on appellant’s first appeal.

3.2. Thereafter the appellant filed the instant appeal before the Commission.

Case No: CIC/MP/A/2014/001233

4. The appellant, Shri Vivek Kumar Bhatnagar submitted RTI application dated 11.04.2014 before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. (OICL), Dehradun in sequel to his earlier RTI applications dated 11.2.2014, 12,02.2014 and 19.02.2014, stating that no information relating to his removal from service was provided by the CPIO in response to his RTI application dated 12.02.2014, as the requested information was required in order to defend his case before the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi against his removal from service.

4.1 The CPIO vide letter dated 23.04.2014 replied point-wise to the appellant. Dissatisfied with the reply of the CPIO, the appellant filed an appeal on 03.05.2014 before the first appellate authority (FAA). The FAA had not adjudicated on appellant’s first appeal.

4.2 Thereafter the appellant filed the instant appeal before the Commission.

Case No: CIC/MP/A/2014/001392

5. The appellant, Shri Vivek Kumar Bhatnagar submitted RTI application dated 16.04.2014 before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. (OICL), Dehradun seeking action taken on his letter 26.3.2012 after he was absolved by the Court, Karkarduma on 31.01.2009; after absolving by the Court sought to know about the payment of his pay and allowances during suspension period and sought action on his letter dated 28.5.2004 pertaining to commendation and experience issued by OICL through three points.

5.1 The CPIO vide letter dated 29.04.2014 informed the appellant that his representation dated 26.3.2012 was forwarded to the Head Office, OICL on 30.3.2012, a copy of the said communication provided to the appellant in response to point 1; on point 2 the appellant was informed that he was removed from service on 22.05.2003 and provided with a copy of the said order in response to point 2 and in response to point 3 no information was available with the respondents. Dissatisfied with the reply of the CPIO, the appellant filed an appeal on 03.05.2014 before the first appellate authority (FAA). The FAA had not adjudicated on appellant’s first appeal.

5.2 Thereafter the appellant filed the instant appeal before the Commission.

6. The matter was heard by the Commission in all the above five appeals. The respondents stated that the appellant was a former employee of the OICL was found guilty of certain acts of misconduct and was removed from service by the competent authority on 22.05.2003, after following due procedure of disciplinary action. They further stated that the appellant vide RTI application dated 11.02.2014 raised 11 queries, similarly vide application dated 12.02.2014 and 19.02.2014 raised 16 and 2 queries respectively. After 12 years of his removal from service the appellant sought information pertaining to the year 1989-90. The OICL, Regional Office was shifted from Ghaziabad to Dehradun, the Branch Office Najibabad (to which the applicant was attached before removal), shifted to Bijnore. Similarly a number of officers either retired or had been transferred during this period. Therefore it was practically not possible to compile the entire series of information sought for by the appellant. The CPIO had endeavoured to collect all information that was available from various  sources and had sent a comprehensive reply vide letter dated 01.04.2014 for all the three RTI applications dated 11.02.2014, 12.02.2014 and 19.02.2014. However, dissatisfied from the reply of the CPIO, the appellant filed appeal before the FAA vide letter dated 20.04.2014 and the same was disposed of by the FAA vide order dated 25.06.2014 by upholding the decision of the CPIO. As for the two RTI applications dated 11.4.2014 and 16.4.2014 the appellant vide RTI application dated 11.04.2014 stated that reply for four points sought for vide his letter dated 12.2.2014 was yet to be received by him. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 23.04.2014.

Dissatisfied with the reply of the CPIO, the appellant filed first appeal on 13.05.2014. The FAA vide order dated 24.06.2014 upheld the reply of the CPIO. Again the appellant through RTI application dated 16.04.2014 sought information on three points. The CPIO vide letter dated 29.04.2014 replied to the appellant. However, dissatisfied from the reply of the CPIO, the appellant filed an appeal on 03.05.2014

before the FAA and the same was disposed of by the FAA vide order dated 02.07.2014.

7. The appellant did not attend the hearing in spite of a written notice of hearing having been sent to him through speed post. Therefore, he was got contacted on telephone to find out if he would be joining the hearing. The appellant intimated that he had not received any notice of hearing in this case. The Commission noted that he had in fact been sent two separate notices by speed post which were received back undelivered with the remarks that ‘the addressee had left the house’. The appeals were therefore decided on merits.

8. After due consideration of the matter, the Commission observes that the appellant through five RTI applications dated 11.02,2014, 12.02.2014, 19.02.2014, 11.04.2014 and 16.04.2014 sought voluminous information pertaining to very old records in order to defend himself against his removal from service in 2003 before the High Court of Delhi. The Commission accepts the submissions of the respondents and holds that the respondents had provided information as per available records to the appellant in response to all the five RTI applications. The Commission finds no reason to intervene in the matter. These appeals are disposed of.

(Manjula Prasher)

Information Commissioner

Citation: Shri Vivek Kumar Bhatnagar v. The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., in Appeal: No. CIC/MP/A/2014/001150. CIC/MP/A/2014/001152, CIC/MP/A/2014/001156, CIC/MP/A/2014/001233,CIC/MP/A/2014/001392