Information about vigilance clearance of CGST superintendent - CIC: Blanket denial by PIO without any justification is not appropriate; Personal detail & identifying particulars of third party be blackened u/s 10; PIO cautioned for abstaining from hearing

Information sought:

The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 13-02-2023 seeking the following information:

“(i) Please Supply copy of letter 11-27(64) Sec/Vig.Clearance/GSTGGM/2019-20/Pt.II/8843 dated 11.02.2022 addressed to Administrative Officer along with copy of note sheet.

(ii) Please supply a copy of vigilance clearance of Mr. Subhash Chander, Supdt. (Retired) sent to CGST (Audit), Commissionerate, Gurugram.

(iii) Please supply copy of relevant Govt. of India order required for calling vigilance clearance to disburse the reward to retired officers.

(iv) Please supply details of action taken by your office since issue of Hon'ble High Court, Delhi's Final order Dt.11.12.2019 in Writ Petition No.4471/2014, 7635/2014 and others. The inordinate delay of more than 3 years may also be elaborated along with copy of note sheet also.

(v) Please supply a copy of action taken on letter F.No. 18011/DR/2020Ad.V/634 dated 25.01.2022 issued by Dy. Secretary Ad.V addressed to your office. A copy of the note sheet also to be provided.

(vi) Please supply a copy of letter dated 06.12.2022 issued by Shajahan Y to Shri Hargun Kumar Khanwani. Retired Superintendent. Please intimate on what ground third party information was shared to him.

(vii) Please supply a copy of action taken on letter F.No DGOV/Vig/INV/15/2022-TeamO/o Pr. ADG-DGOVNZU Delhi dated 09.12.2022 addressed to your office. Please also supply the copy of note sheet along with chronological events henceforth.

(viii) Please provide the details of vigilance clearance pending in your office. The information may be supplied. date of vigilance clearance letter received in your office; date of vigilance clearance sent by your office. pending vigilance clearance and reason for pendency in your office sent may kindly be supplied.

(ix) Kindly provide reasons for not issuing Exoneration Orders despite lapse of a period more than 5 years since issue of Interim Order's of Hon'ble High Court dated 06.12.2017 and Final Order Dated. 11.12.2019 - where in it was directed to release all pay and allowances (otherwise due) and grant all other benefits due within 3 months from 06/12/2017. In this regard it is known fact that Smt Ritu Choudhary, Supdt was issued Exoneration Orders in Dec.2022, however no orders were issued till date to Sh. Subhash Chander Supdt (now retired) and DR Chandrasekhar, Supdt. even though all of them are posted in the same Gurugram Commissionerate. Reasons for such discrimination clearly indicates caste feeling and mala fide intention. Reasons for such act may be given along with documentary evidence.”

The CPIO furnished a point-wise reply to the Appellant on 09-03-2023 stating as under:

“Point No. (1) - (8):

Since matter pertains to Disciplinary Proceedings against the CBIC officer being Confidential in nature the information cannot be provided under Section 8(1) (e) of RTI Act, 2005.

Point No. (9):

Kindly find enclosed Final Order dated. 28.02.2023 for Exoneration and Release of all allowance [otherwise due) and grant all other benefit due, which has been issued as per procedure prescribed in Vigilance Manual and under certain guidelines issued time to time vide Circular/ Notification issued by various Competent Authorities.”

Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 17-03-2023. The FAA vide its order dated 11-04-2023, upheld the reply of the CPIO.

Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal on the ground of denial of information by the CPIO.

Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:

The following were present:-

Appellant: Not present.

Respondent: Not present.

Both the parties were absent during the hearing.

Decision:

The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case and perusal of the records, observes that blanket denial of information by the PIO against Point No. 1 to 8 of the RTI Application without any justification and hence, it is not appropriate response as per the provisions of the RTI Act.

Therefore, the PIO is directed to revisit the contents of Points No. 1 to 8 of RTI Application and provide an updated point-wise information/document against each point to the Appellant. In doing so, personal details and identifying particulars of third party be blackened out as per Section 10 of the RTI Act. This direction be complied with within four weeks from the date of receipt of this order.

First Appellate Authority to ensure compliance of the directions.

For Point No. 9 of RTI Application, no infirmity is found in reply of the PIO as it was found to be in consonance with the provisions of the RTI Act.

Notwithstanding the above, the Commission viewed the conduct of the Respondent adversely for remaining absent during the hearing, despite prior intimation. This shows his/her disregard towards rights of a citizen, Law of the Land, and his obligation thereunder besides towards the proceedings of the Commission. Hence, the CPIO is sternly cautioned to be careful in future and avoid causing such lapses to avoid attracting any penal action.

The appeal is dismissed accordingly.

Vinod Kumar Tiwari

Information Commissioner

Citation: Subhash Chander v. Central Goods & Service Tax, CIC/DGSTX/A/2023/120744; Date of Decision: 29-04-2024