A one stop destination for all Right to Information (RTI) matters

one stop destination for all Right to Information (RTI) matters

Central Empowered Committee: Documents pertaining to particular application filed by Sheth Anandji Kalyanji Trust and sought by the Applicant are not available in records - CIC: Appropriate response has been provided; Explain the absence during hearing

Refusal by Financial Services Institutions Bureau (FSIB) to provide information related to the appointment of Mr. Pankaj Dwivedi, accused of heinous crimes against women, as Executive Director in Public Sector Banks - CIC: Denail u/s 8(1)(j) is justified

What does the term “Relevant Trades” in eligibility criteria mean? - CIC: Requisite information should have been disclosed upfront or through FAQs; Advisory issued u/s 25(5) to disclose the meaning of “Relevant Trade” & to create a FAQ section on website

Respondent: Complaint has been forwarded to the Special Commissioner (Vig.) Delhi Police for necessary action; Delhi Police works under MHA, GoI which is a separate Government - CIC: PIO is only a communicator of information based on the records held

CIC: Though the reply given by the PIO, Brach Office was appropriate as the file was not available with them, the fact remains that the file was available with the Corporate Office - CIC: Collect the information u/s 5(4) and provide to the appellant

Information regarding who is authority to work as Central Government u/s 3,5,16, and 19 of The FTDR Act, 1992 - Respondent: Deduction is not covered under the definition of information u/s 2(f) of the RTI Act - CIC: No infirmity in the reply

Vijai Sharma and K V Chowdary appointed as CIC and CVC respectively

Is the Mysore Police Commissioner’s office coming up without plan approval?

No action taken against the illegal massage parlours or spas in Goa

Are there norms about the fee a school should charge and the facilities it offers?

There is only 1 primary health centre per 28 villages of UP

Services of all OSDs / Consultants terminated by Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai

RTI portal – Supreme Court issues contempt notice to the States and UTs

Reasons for seeking certified copies is not inconsistent with the provisions of RTI Act

Regulation 21 of Consumer Protection Regulation does not prohibit grant of records to RTI Applicants

2nd edition of "PIOs Guide on RTI" published - Based on study of over one lakh orders of CIC and judgments of Courts - Book carries subject wise case laws, latest legal updates, Practical tips for PIOs and FAAs - Needs of all stakeholders covered

Share on facebook Tweet Email Gmail Google Rediff

Respondent: As per FCI circular, confidential report may be weeded out after 5 years of retirement; APAR dossier of Appellant has been weeded out with the approval of the Competent Authority - CIC: PIO to furnish a copy of the Record Retention Schedule

8 Jan, 2024

Information sought and background of the case:

CIC/MCAFP/A/2022/657074

The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 08.03.2022seeking information on following points:-

“1. Provide the Copies of ACRS for the years 1999 to 2011.

2. Is there any adverse remarks against me that cause hindrance in my next promotion.

3. Intimate where after there is any vigilance case during the period my promotion as AG-II (D)”

The CPIO/Assistant General Manager, Regional Office, Chandigarh vide letter dated 29.04.2022 replied as under:-

“In this regard, Annual Confidential Report (ACR) and Annual Performance Assessment Report (APAR) are maintained by the zonal office (nodal office). Therefore, your letter has been sent to Zonal Office (North), Noida for further action.”

The CPIO/Assistant General Manager (Vigilance) vide letter dated 27.04.2022 providing copy as information in context to Vigilance Profile:-

Staff Code - 06665

Name - Inder Sain

Designation - AG 1 (D)

DOB - 15.03.1952

Purpose - Furnish the Vigilance profile of Ex official for the period of 2000 to 2010 for deciding legal notice release for of promotion as M(D)

Vig Status - As per records available at FCI, RO Punjab, there is no profile of the said official.

The CPIO/Assistant General Manager, Zonal Office, NOIDA vide letter dated 23.06.2022 replied as under:-

“1-2. In this regard, it is informed that as per FCI Hqrs., New Delhi weed out circular no. 10- 4(24)/79-OMISS dated 07.03.1989, confidential report may be weed out after 5 years of retirement. Accordingly your APAR dossier has been weeded out with the approval of the Competent Authority. 3. As per your representation, reply has already been given by FCI RO: Chandigarh (PB).”

Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 18.04.2022. The FAA/vide order dated 22.07.2022stated as under:-

“In this regard, according to the facts given in the appeal, the information sent by the letter dated 29.04.2022 of the CPIO/Assistant General Manager (General/APAR) of this office and the letter of the Assistant General Manager (ACPIO) of Bhakhani, Zonal Office (North), Noida. After perusal of date 23.06.2022 (photocopy attached), it is informed that ACR/APAR of year 1999 to 2011 is not available in this office and Bhakhani, Zonal Office (North), Noida has also informed that Headquarters, New As per Delhi circular, APAR has been weeded out after 05 years of retirement.”

Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.

Written submission dated 29.11.2023 has been received from the Appellant and same has been taken on record.

Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:

Appellant: Present via VC

Respondent: Mr. Mukesh Diwedi, DGM (Pers)/CPIO, FCI, ZO, Noida

The Appellant stated that relevant information has not been furnished to him till date. He further stated that he had sought his ACRs for the year 1999 to 2011 but the same has not been furnished to him till date.

The Respondent stated that relevant information has been duly furnished to the Appellant. He further stated that as per FCI Hqrs., New Delhi weed out circular no. 10- 4(24)/79-OMISS dated 07.03.1989, confidential report may be weeded out after 5 years of retirement. Accordingly, APAR dossier of Appellant has been weeded out with the approval of the Competent Authority.

Decision:

At the outset, Commission directs the concerned PIO to furnish a copy of their latest written submission along with annexures if any, to the Appellant, free of cost via speed-post and via e-mail, within 07 days from the date of receipt of this order and accordingly, compliance report be sent to the Commission.

Commission has gone through the case records and on the basis of proceedings during hearing observes that an appropriate response as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 has been provided by the Respondent since only such information that is held and available with a public authority can be provided to the information seekers. Hence, no further intervention of the Commission is required in the instant matter. However, the PIO shall furnish a copy of the Record Retention Schedule as followed by their department to the Appellant free of cost via speed post within 07 days from the date of receipt of this order and accordingly, compliance report be sent to the Commission.

The Appeal is disposed of accordingly.

Heeralal Samariya

Chief Information Commissioner

Citation: Shri Inder Sain v. Food Corporation of India & Ministry of Consumer Affair, CIC/MCAFP/A/2022/657074; Date of Decision: 06.12.2023

Respondent: As per FCI circular, confidential report may be weeded out after 5 years of retirement; APAR dossier of Appellant has been weeded out with the approval of the Competent Authority - CIC: PIO to furnish a copy of the Record Retention Schedule

Share your comments with RTI Foundation of India.