BY SPEED POST
Ref: SYS/RTI/MoD/NFU/2013 10th September, 2013
To,
Under Secretary & CPIO,
D (Pay/Services)
Ministry of Defence,
Sena Bhawan,
New Delhi 110 011
REQUEST FOR
INFORMATION: NON-FUNCTIONAL UPGRADATION
Sir,
1. Reference is
invited to DOP & T OM No - AB. 14017/64/2008-Estt.(RR) dated 24.04.09 on
the above subject and subsequent OMs.
2. Please
provide me information on the decision of the MoD to extend or not to extend
the benefit of Non-Functional Upgradation to personnel of the Armed Forces by
way of notings on files, records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices,
press releases, circulars, orders, reports, papers, data in support of
decisions and also any relevant material held in electronic form.
3. Indian
Postal Order Number 65G 724817 of Rs 10/- payable at New Delhi to Accounts
Officer (DAD), Ministry of Defence (Civil) is enclosed as application fee..
4. It is
reiterated for reasons provided in previous correspondence, this applicant may
not be requested to visit the offices of MoD to search files etc and then seek
photocopies of relevant material. This applicant may be apprised, as has been
done earlier, the amount to paid @ Rs 2 per page of photocopied information to
enable expeditious compliance to obtain the information.
Thanking you,
Yours truly,
Sd/-------
Also Submitted On
line vide MODEF/R/2013/60351 & 60352 & 60355 of 10 Sep 13;
Submissions repeated due to problems on the RTIonline website
* * * * *
Ref: SYS/RTI/MoD/NFU/2013 23rd
September, 2013
To,
Under Secretary & CPIO,
D (Pay/Services)
Ministry of Defence,
Sena Bhawan,
New Delhi 110 011
REQUEST FOR
INFORMATION: NON-FUNCTIONAL UPGRADATION
Sir,
1. Reference is invited to DOP & T OM No - AB.
14017/64/2008-Estt.(RR) dated 24.04.09 on the above subject and subsequent OMs
and RTI application of even reference dated 4th September 2013.
2. The Indian Postal Order Number 65G 724817 is value of Rs
50/- payable at New Delhi to Accounts Officer (DAD), Ministry of Defence
(Civil) is enclosed as application fee and advance payment towards 20 pages of
photocopied information. The denomination was erroneously typed as Rs 10.
Photocopy of counterfoil of IPO is given below.
Thanking you,
Yours truly,
Sd/----------
* * * * *
SPEED POST
RIGHT TO
INFORMATION ACT, 2005
FIRST APPEAL FOR CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
FIRST APPEAL FOR CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
I.D. No____________________ Date: _________
[For office use]
To,
Shri Praveen Kumar, Director (AG-I) & First Appellate Authority,
Ministry of Defence, Govt of India,
Room No. 103, Sena Bhawan, New Delhi - 110011
Sir,
As I am aggrieved by no decision of Under Secretary & Central Public Information Officer, Pay/Service, Ministry of Defence, Sena Bhawan, New Delhi – 110 011 on my request for information dated 11 Sep 13 sent by Speed Post (article EK420215664) vide SYS/RTI/MoD/NFU/2013 dated 10 Sep 13 and repeated on RTI Online vide Ref No. MODEF/R/2013/(60351/60352)/D(RTI) dated 11 Sep 13 I hereby file this appeal for your kind decision.
1. Details of
appellant:
(i)
Full Name: Sharad Yeshwant Savur
(ii)
Full Address: 141, Jal Vayu Towers,
NGEF Layout, Indira Nagar (PO), Bangalore-560038
(iii)
Phone/Cell No: +91 9449676278
(iv)
Email ID: sysavur@gmail.com
2. Details of CPIO: -
(i) Name/Designation: Under Secretary (Pay/Services) & CPIO
(i) Name/Designation: Under Secretary (Pay/Services) & CPIO
(ii) Full Address:
Sena Bhawan, Ministry of Defence, Govt of India, New Delhi - 110011
(iii) Name of Public
Authority: Ministry of Defence
3. Details of RTI application to CPIO: -
(i) Date of Application: By Speed Post 10.09.2013; by RTI Online: 11.9.2013
3. Details of RTI application to CPIO: -
(i) Date of Application: By Speed Post 10.09.2013; by RTI Online: 11.9.2013
(ii) Mailed on:
10.9.2013 & 11.9.2013 respectively
(iii) By Speed Post
No. EK 420215664IN & RTI Online ID No. MODEF/R/2013/(60351 &
60352)/D(RTI)
(iv)
Date of receipt by CPIO: Not Indicated
4. Particulars of payment of filing fee +
additional fee: -
(i) Paid Rs.50/- by IPO No 65G 724817/-
issued by INDIRA NAGAR Post office and
(ii) Application fee of Rs 10/- per
application by Internet banking for RTI Online
5.
Details of information sought: -
5.1. Reference is invited to DOP & T OM No - AB. 14017/64/2008-Estt.(RR) dated 24.04.09 on the above subject and subsequent OMs.
5.2. Please
provide me information on the decision of the MoD to extend or not to extend
the benefit of Non-Functional Upgradation to personnel of the Armed Forces by
way of notings on files, records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices,
press releases, circulars, orders, reports, papers, data in support of
decisions and also any relevant material held in electronic form.
5.3. Indian
Postal Order Number 65G 724817 of Rs 10/- payable at New Delhi to Accounts
Officer (DAD), Ministry of Defence (Civil) is enclosed as application fee.
5.4. It
is reiterated for reasons provided in previous correspondence, this applicant
may not be requested to visit the offices of MoD to search files etc and then
seek photocopies of relevant material. This applicant may be apprised, as has
been done earlier, the amount to paid @ Rs 2 per page of photocopied
information to enable expeditious compliance to obtain the information.
6. Particulars of Decision of CPIO: -
(i)
Letter reference No:
NIL
(ii)
Date of CPIO’s Decision:
No Decision
(iii)
Date of receipt of decision by the
appellant: Not Applicable
7. Brief facts of the case: -
7. Brief facts of the case: -
7.1. As
per the DOP&T OM No - AB.
14017/64/2008-Estt.(RR) dated 24.04.09 on the and subsequent OMs n
Non-Functional Upgradation (NFU), this applicant requests information to
understand why the same has not been extended to personnel of the Armed Forces.
7.2. Till date MoD, as Competent
Ministry/Authority, has neither conveyed that NFU will not be implemented for
Armed Forces personnel nor implemented the NFU.
8.
Reasons/grounds for this appeal: -
8.1.
Reasons for this appeal: - To gain
knowledge and understand the process by which MoD is either intending to
implement NFU for Armed Forces personnel, or
8.2. Know of the reasons why MoD considers NFU
cannot be extended to personnel of the Armed Forces.
8.3.
Grounds for this Appeal:
No Reply from CPIO
9. Any other information in support of appeal: Speed Post - article EK420215664: -
9.1. Track of Delivery from India Post of RTI
application posted on 10 Sep 13
|
Track Result
for:EK420215664IN
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Detailed Track Events For EK420215664IN
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
9.2. Photocopy of MoD ID No. MODEF/R/2013/(60351 &
60352)/D(RTI)
10. Prayer/relief
sought for: - Please provide
me with copy of the complete information on decision to implement or not to
implement Non-Functional Upgradation for personnel of Armed Forces.
11. Grounds for
prayer/relief sought for: - US & CPIO (Pay/Services) has not provided the information
thereby placing hurdles in clearing my perception of the deficiencies and
understanding the reasons for not extending NFU to personnel of Armed Forces.
12. Personal Presence at hearing: - No
13. Enclosures: - Photocopies of
13. Enclosures: - Photocopies of
(i) Original RTI
application with its enclosures: -
attached
(ii) Postal proof of mailing Speed Post: - attached
(iii) Acknowledgement
of CPIO:
-
Not received
(iv) Decision letter of CPIO:
-
Not received
14. Declaration:
I hereby state that the information and particulars given above are true to the best of my knowledge and belief. I also declare that this matter is not previously filed with any information commission nor is pending with any Court or tribunal or authority.
14. Declaration:
I hereby state that the information and particulars given above are true to the best of my knowledge and belief. I also declare that this matter is not previously filed with any information commission nor is pending with any Court or tribunal or authority.
Sd/-------------------
Place: Bangalore
Date: 17th October
2013
Signature of appellant
[P.S. Format as per office memorandum dated 09-07-2007 issued by DoP&T, Govt. of India.]
[P.S. Format as per office memorandum dated 09-07-2007 issued by DoP&T, Govt. of India.]
|
Track Result
for:EK420241324IN
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Detailed Track Events For EK420241324IN
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
* * * * *
By REGD POST -AD
SYS/RTI/MoD/2013/Second Appeal 16 Nov 13
To,
(1) Shri Praveen Kumar, (2) Shri P S Walia,
Director (AG-I) & First
Appellate Authority, CPIO
& Under Secretary (Pay/Services),
Ministry of Defence, Ministry
of Defence,
Room No. 103, Sena Bhawan, Sena Bhawan,
New Delhi – 110 011 New
Delhi – 110 011
Subject: Second Appeal to Central Information Commission
Sir,
As required by the Central
Information Commission process before filing a Second Appeal, the undersigned
is hereby intimating the CPIO and the First Appellate Authority with reference
to original application SYS/RTI/MoD/NFU/2013 dated 10 Sep 13, MoD RTI Cell ID
No. MODEF/R/2013/ (60351 & 60352)/ D (RTI) dated 11 Sep 13 and First Appeal
dated 17 Oct 13 sent by Speed Post article EK420241324IN on the same date.
2. Under Secretary (D-Pay/Services) & CPIO did not respond
to my original application(s) sent by Speed Post dated 10 Sep 13 with a Rs 50/-
(IPO No. 65G 744817) as application fee and an advance payment for photocopies
of information, and on-line applications (duplicated due RTIONline website
problems) dated 08 Sep 13 within the time limit of 30 days + 5 days,
(processing time taken within MoD to place the application before
CPIO/Appellate Authority as evidenced
from Appellate Authority letter MoD No. 35 (1)/2013-D (Pay/Services) dated 20
Sep 13).
3. Therefore, I filed a First Appeal dated 17 Oct 13. As per
RTI Act 2005, Section 19 (6), the disposal period of 30 days (+5 days taken by
MoD to put up the Appeal to the Appellate Authority) expires on 22 Nov 13.
4. Under Sec 19 (3), the Second Appeal with the Central
Information Commission will be filed based on the RTI Cell of MoD vide ID No.
MODEF/R/2013/ (60351 & 60352)/ D (RTI) dated 11 Sep 13.
5. Enclosures i.e. original RTI applications dated 08 Sep 13
& 10 Sep 13, and First Appeal dated 17 Oct 13 with enclosures are not
attached as the originals are already in MoD
(D-Pay/Services) files.
Yours sincerely,
Sd/----------------
* * * * *
Government of India
Ministry of Defence
No. 35 (11)/2013/D (Pay/Services) New Delhi, the 18th
Nov, 2013
ORDER
Subject: Appeal under Section 19 of RTI Act,
2005 filed by Shri S Y Savur
Reference
is invited to Appeal dated 17.10.2013 filed by Shri S Y Savur (received on
22.10.2013) against the non response within the time limit by CPIO of MoD to
his RTI applications regarding grant of non-functional upgradation to the
personnel of Armed Forces.
2. I have considered
the aforesaid appeal on the basis of the facts submitted by the appellant and
comments furnished by the CPIO of MoD. It is stated that your previous RTI
requests has already been considered in the section and reply to your RTI
requests has already been sent to you on 8.10.2013.
3. The appeal is, thus, not maintainable
against the CPIO of MoD. However, a copy of MoD reply dated 8.10.2013 is again
sent to you for information and further necessary action.
Sd/-------------------------
(Praveen Kumar)
Director (AG-I) &
Appellate Authority
Copy of this order be supplied to: - Shri S Y Savur, 141,
Jal Vayu Towers. NGEF Layout, Indira Nagar (PO), Bangalore-560038
* * * * *
RTI Matter
Immediate
No. 35 (11)/2013/D
(Pay/Services)
Government of India
Ministry of Defence
New
Delhi, the 8th October, 2013
To,
Shri S Y
Savur,
141, Jal
Vayu Towers,
N G E F
Layout,
Indira
Nagar (PO),
Bangalore –
560038
Subject:
Information sought under RTI Act 2005 – Non Functional Upgradation
Sir,
This is
with reference to your application dated 4.9.2013 (received on 17.9.2013) and
dated 23.9.2013 (recd on 27.9.2013) and two applications sent via internet
dated 8.9.2013 received from D (RTI) section vide MoD ID No. MODEF/R/2013/(^0351/60352)/D
(RTI) dated 11.9.2013 on the above subject.
2. The issue of Non Functional Upgradation to personnel of the
Armed Forces was one of the five issues relating to service personnel which
were considered by the Committee headed by Cabinet Secretary. The Committee
submitted its Report to the Prime Minister. It is stated that the
recommendations on pay related issues of the report of the Committee have been
further examined in Ministry of Defence and it has been still decided to wait.
3. If you are not satisfied with the information provided you
may write to the Appellate Authority, Shri Praveen Kumar, Director (AG-I),
Ministry of Defence, Room No. 102, Sena Bhavan, New Delhi within 30 days.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-----------------------
(P. S. Walia)
Under Secretary &
CPIO
* * * * *
BY REGD POST – ACK DUE
SYS/RTI/MoD/NFU/080913/Complaint 26 Nov 13
To,
The Registrar,
O/o Chief Information Commissioner
II Floor, August Kranti Bhavan,
Bhikaji Cama Place,
New Delhi - 110 066
Subject: Complaint under Section 18 of the RTI Act 2005
1. I submit an updated copy of Complaint
dated 26 Nov 13 due to receipt, on 25 Nov 13, of Order of Appellate Authority,
MoD vide No. 35 (11)/2013 –D (Pay/Services) dated 18 Nov 13 (originally dated
25 Nov 13) under Section 18 of the RTI Act 2005 to the O/o Central Information
Commissioner
(a) Against the
US (D- Pay/Services) & CPIO, MoD, and Appellate Authority for
not providing me information in terms of Sec 2 (f) of the
RTI Act 2005 (i.e. notings on files, records, documents, memos, e-mails,
opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, reports, papers, data
against my request dated 08 Sep 2013 sent by RTI Online and followed up by
Speed Post on 10 Sep 13 and,
(b) Against the Director (AG-I) & First Appellate
Authority, MoD in respect to my
first Appeal dated 17 Oct 13 for providing, yet again, information which is
incomplete in response to my appeal dated 17 Oct 13.
2. Copies of the original complaint were
sent by Speed Post on 25 Nov 13 at 12.11 pm to the US, MoD (D-Pay/Services)
& CPIO, and Director (AG-I) & Appellate Authority, MoD.
3. At 5.pm on 25 Nov 13, this complainant
has received a reply from Appellate Authority, MoD vide 35 (11)/2013/D
(Pay/Services) dated 18 Nov 13 stating that my “….appeal was not maintainable…”
because the CPIO had replied to my request on 8 Oct 13.
4. If such a reply had ever received, then filing a First Appeal would not
only have been frivolous, vexatitious but also contrary to paths of honour,
truth, and justice that I, a senior citizen, have held foremost as principles
of my life, even when denied information guaranteed under the RTI Act 2005
(details in Para 10 of the accompanying complaint). Curiously, this reply of 08
Oct 13 was not received, if it was sent at all
but another reply in another RTI matter from the same Appellate
Authority dated 9 Oct 13 (referred to in Para 10 of the Complaint) was received
on 15 Oct 13.
5. In this instant request for
information, a photocopy dated 08 Oct 13 being the reply of CPIO has been,
inter alia…. “it has been still decided to wait” which is not information
requested for in terms of Sec 2 (f) of the RTI Act 2005 (i.e. notings on files,
records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars,
orders, reports, and paid for in advance vide IPO enclosed with the RTI
application dated 10 Sep 13, over and above application fee paid through RTI
Online (MODEF/R/2013/60351 & 60352/D (RTI) dated 11 Sep 13). Further it,
the reply dated 8 Oct 13, is still listed in the Pending applications on the
RTI online site.
6. This complainant prays to produce
corroborative evidence of such tactics adopted by US (D-Pay/Services) &
CPIO and also Director (AG-I) & Appellate Authority in not providing
information relevant to an earlier request for information, details of which
are provided in Para 10 of this complaint.
7. An updated complaint, consequent to
receipt of a reply from Appellate Authority dated 18 Nov 13 is submitted for
consideration of the Central Information Commission.
Thanking
you
Yours
truly,
Sd/----------
(S Y Savur)
Encl: Original + one copy with enclosures
Copy without Annexures to: -
(1) Shri Praveen
Kumar, Director (AG-I) & Appellate Authority, Ministry of Defence, Room No.
103, Sena Bhawan, New Delhi – 110 011
(2) Shri P S
Walia, Under Secretary (D-Pay/Services) & CPIO, Ministry of Defence, Sena
Bhawan, New Delhi – 110 011
* * * * * * *
Right to Information Act, 2005
Updated Complaint under Section 18
before Central Information Commission
INDEX OF COMPLAINT
of Mr SHARAD YESHWANT
SAVUR dated 26th November
2013 with CIC
|
S No.
|
Particulars
|
Page Sr. No. from/
to
|
|
1
|
Original Complaint
|
2-7
|
|
2
|
Chronology chart of RTI application
|
8
|
|
3
|
Copy receipt dated 11 Sep 2013 of RTI on line application dated
08 Sep 2013
|
9, 10
|
|
4
|
Copy of proof of mailing RTI application
|
10
|
|
5
|
Copy of IPO receipt for filing fees and other charges
|
-
|
|
6
|
Copy of First Appeal dated 17 Oct 2013 with enclosures
|
11-14
|
|
7
|
Copy of proof of mailing First Appeal
|
14
|
|
8
|
Postal AD card/Acknowledgement letter received from CPIO
& FAA
|
-
|
|
9
|
Copy of decision of CPIO
|
-
|
|
10
|
Copy of decision of FAA dated 18 Nov 13
|
15
|
|
12
|
Other documents in support of Complaint
|
16-24
|
Place: Bangalore - 560038
Date: 26 Nov 13 Sd/------------------------
Signature of
appellant/complainant
The Right to Information Act, 2005
Updated Complaint under Section 18
before Central Information Commission
Appeal No. ----------------------- Dated
------------------------
[For office use only]
* * * * *
As I am aggrieved by decision of Under
Secretary (D-Pay/Services) & Central Public Information Officer, MoD and
Director (AG-I) and First Appellate Authority, MoD, I hereby file this complaint
under Section 18 for your kind and expeditious decision.
1. Details of Complainant:
1.1. Full Name: SHARAD
YESHWANT SAVUR
1.2. Full Address: 141,
JAL VAYU TOWERS,
N
G E F LAYOUT,
INDIRA
NAGAR (PO),
BANGALORE
– 560 038
1.3. Phone/Cell No.: +91
9449676278
2. Details of Central Public Information
Officer (CPIO):
2.1. Name/Designation: Shri P
S WALIA,
UNDER
SECRETARY, D (PAY/SERVICES) & CPIO
2.2. Full Address: MINISTRY
OF DEFENCE,
SENA
BHAWAN, NEW DELHI – 110 011
2.3. Name of Public Authority: MINISTRY OF DEFENCE
3. Details of First Appellate Authority
[FAA]:
3.1. Name/Designation of the FAA: SHRI
PRAVEEN KUMAR,
DIRECTOR
(AG-I) & APPELLATE AUTHORITY
3.2. Full Address of FAA: MINISTRY
OF DEFENCE,
Room
No 103, SENA BHAWAN, NEW DELHI – 110011
4.1. To CPIO: By RTI Online vide M of D ID No. MODEF/R/2013
(60351 & 60352)/D (RTI) dt 11 Sep 2013 and SYS/RTI/MoD/NFU dated 10 Sep 13
by Speed Post (Annexure ‘A-1’ and ‘A-2’)
4.2. To FAA: 17 Oct 13 (Annexure ‘B’).
5. Particulars of Decisions:
5.1. Reference No & Date of CPIO Decision: N0. 35 (11)/2013 – D
(Pay/Services) dated 08 Oct 13; photocopy received with order of Appellate
Authority; Original missing in post.
5.2. Reference No & Date of FAA’s Decision: No. 35 (11)/2013 –
D (Pay/Services) dated 18 Nov 13
5.3. Date/s of personal hearing by FAA: Not Requested by appellant.
6. Dates of receipt of replies by appellant
from:
6.1. CPIO: NOT RECEIVED
6.2. FAA: 25
Nov 13 (5 pm) (Annexure C)
7. Details of information sought:
7.1. This
applicant/appellant/complainant, inviting the attention of CPIO, MoD
(D-Pay/Services), with reference to DOP & T OM No - AB.
14017/64/2008-Estt.(RR) dated 24.04.09 on the subject of Non-Functional
upgradation for Central Government officers and subsequent OMs, was requested
for information, in terms of Sec 2 (f) of the RTI Act 2005, on decision to
extend or not to extend the benefit of Non-Functional Upgradation to eligible
Armed Forces personnel way of notings on files, records, documents, memos,
e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, reports, papers,
data in support of decisions and also any relevant material held in electronic
form.
7.2. This applicant/appellant/complainant
attached an Indian Postal Order Number 65G 724817 of a value of Rs 50/- payable
at New Delhi to Accounts Officer (DAD), Ministry of Defence (Civil) was
enclosed as application fee + advance payment of Rs 40/- for 20 pages @ Rs 2/-
per photocopied sheet of information alongwith the application dated 10 Sep 13
to preclude any delays by CPIO in providing information (Annexure A-2).
7.3. It was reiterated, for health reasons (borderline
hyper-tension, elevated cholesterol levels and impaired glucose tolerance) provided
in previous correspondence with MoD (D-Pay/Services), that this applicant/appellant
may not be requested to visit the offices of MoD to search files etc and then
seek photocopies of relevant material. This applicant/appellant/complainant
requested that he may be apprised, as has been done earlier, the amount to paid
@ Rs 2 per page of photocopied information to enable expeditious compliance by
this applicant/appellant to obtain the information.
8.
Brief facts of the case
8.1. As per the DOP&T OM No - AB.
14017/64/2008-Estt.(RR) dated 24.04.09 on the and subsequent OMs on
Non-Functional Upgradation (NFU), this applicant/appellant requested
information to understand reasons for inapplicability or otherwise of the said
NFU to eligible personnel of the Armed Forces.
8.2. Till date MoD, as Competent
Ministry/Authority, has neither conveyed that NFU will not be implemented for
Armed Forces personnel nor when will MoD
implement the NFU for eligible Armed Forces Officers.
9. Reasons/grounds for this complaint:
9.1. Reasons
for this Complaint: - No reply was received from
US & CPIO (D-Pay/Services) MoD to application dated 08 Sep 13 (by RTI on
line) or by Speed Post dated 10 Sep 13 within the time frame stipulated under
the RTI Act 2005 so the First Appeal was filed on 17 Oct 13.
9.2.
The First Appeal was filed with Director (AG-I) & Appellate
Authority, Ministry of Defence on 17 Oct 13. This appeal elicited a reply dated
on 18 Nov 13, which was and was received by this applicant/appellant on 25 Nov
13 (photocopy of envelope at Annexure C).
Curiously, the Order stated that the CPIO had sent a reply on 08 Oct 13, a
photo-copy of which was attached.
9.3.
This applicant/appellant maintains the envelopes with the postal franking in
case of any doubt on the date that any information is delivered by India Post
to this applicant/appellant till the matter is resolved by the Appellate
Authority or the O/o CIC, as necessary.
9.3. Grounds for this Complaint: Unsatisfactory/incomplete
Reply from CPIO as only a photocopy has been received attached to the Order of
the Appellate Authority.
10. Any other
information in support of Complaint:
US & CPIO (D-Pay/Services)
and Director (AG-I) and Appellate Authority have treated an earlier RTI
application by denying information (i) citing no records, especially when
UoI/MoD has been the Respondent or Petitioner or Appellant in the Rank Pay
matter in Maj (retd) Dhanapalan Vs UoI (OP 2448/1996 and W.A. No. 518/1999 in
the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala) and UoI Vs Lt Col N K Nair & others in TP
(C) No. 56 of 2007 and IA No. 9 of 2010 in the Hon’ble Supreme Court, or (ii)
any other information requested that appears to be inconvenient for them to
provide. One example is as follows: -
10.1. In an earlier request dated 24 Jun 13 for
information to provide a Statement of Case (SoC), there was no response within
the time limits fixed by the RTI Act 2005, from the same US (D-Pay/Services)
& CPIO for the specific request was for a copy of the SoC of the MoD to be
sent to the Ld Attorney General for India, consequent to the decision of the
Hon’ble Raksha Mantri on 14 Jun 2013 in the Rank Pay case and to the first
Appeal made on 12 Aug 13.
10.2 In the above referred request for
information dated 24 Jun 13, to which the US (D-Pay/Services) & CPIO
provided a vague, even false reply, the Appellate Authority provided 491 pages
demanding a payment of Rs 982/-.
10.3. Therefore, it was obvious that Appellate
Authority provided incorrect information nearly three months later, vide MoD
No. 35 (1)/2013/D (Pay/Services) dated 20 Sep 13 (photocopy attached as Annexure D) and received by this
appellant on 08 Oct 13 (photocopy of envelope at Annexure D, reverse side).
10.4. Fortuitously, from information obtained under
RTI from MoF, DoE [vide I. D. No. 187654/E.III-A/2012 dated 05 Jul 13,
(photocopy at Annexure E)],
indicated that the MoD (i.e D-Pay/Services) had not prepared even a draft
SoC for the opinion of Ld Attorney General of India. Based on this
information, this appellant returned the 491 pages of infructuous material vide
SYS/RTI/MoD/2013 dated 9 Oct 13 (Annexure
F).
10.5. MoD letter of even reference dated 09 Oct 13
(photocopy at Annexure G) in
response to advance information of intention to file a Second Appeal (dated 30
Sep 13) reiterated the same as the letter of 20 Sep 13.
10.6. It was obvious that US MoD (D-Pay/Services)
& CPIO and Director (AG-I) MoD & Appellate Authority were thwarting a
genuine request for information by overwhelming this appellant with voluminous
but, incorrect and, irrelevant information. This was brought out by this then
applicant/appellant letter in a more detailed manner on 15 Oct 13 (photocopy at
Annexure H) to which there is no
refutation by the Appellate Authority till date of mailing this complaint .
10.7. On 30 Sep 13,
this complainant had filed a Second Appeal against the above Director (AG-I)
MoD & Appellate Authority and the US (D-Pay/Services) & CPIO, MoD for
not responding to (i) the request for information dated 24 Jun 13 and (ii)
First Appeal dated 12 Aug 13 eliciting the information provided by MoD vide its
letter dated 20 Sep 13.
10.8. The
undersigned withdrew that Second Appeal in
the hope that the authorities entrusted with implementing the RTI Act 2005 would,
thenceforth, take necessary corrective action and comply with the RTI Act 2005
in letter and in spirit (notwithstanding the fact that Appellate Authority
providing information which was not relevant to the undersigned’s request and
further demanding that this applicant/appellant pay Rs 982/- for 491 pages of
information which was irrelevant to the request.
11. Prayer/relief sought
for: Information may be provided, as requested vide this
applicant/appellant/complainant’s request dated 08 Oct 13 by RTI online and 10
Sep 13 by Speed Post, in sanctioning or not sanctioning Non-Functional
Upgradation for eligible Armed Forces officers in terms of Sec 2 (f) of the RTI
Act 2005.
12. Grounds for prayer/relief sought for:
12.1. This
applicant/appellant/ complainant has factually and truthfully not received
information from US (Pay/Services) & CPIO within 30 days from date of
receipt of the applications dated 08 Sep 13 or 10 Sep 13.
12.2. If at all the
MoD reply as stated vide MoD No. 35(11)/2013/D-Pay/Services dated 18 Nov 13 has
been despatched, this complainant may be provided the Speed Post/RPAD article
number to take up the matter with India Posts, for non-delivery, with a similar
request that CPIO and Appellate Authority do the same.
12.3. In the reply
No. 35 (11)/2013/D (Pay/Services) dated 08 Oct 13, CPIO states “…..it has been
decided to wait.” This does not provide information as per Sec 2 (f) on the
decision to implement NFU for Armed Forces personnel or not to do so.
12.4. Relief Sought: - Applicants/appellants/complainants
have to produce proof of mailing, but such an onus is not there on any CPIO or
Appellate Authority. Remedial steps may be taken in this regard.
This
Complainant prays for action under Section 18 of the RTI Act 2005 against the
US & CPIO (D-Pay/Services) MoD and Director (AG-I) & Appellate
Authority, MoD., including any deterrent punishment as deemed fit by the O/0
CIC for grounds given in the RTI website explaining the aims of Section
18.
13. Personal Presence at hearing: NO
14. Declaration:
I hereby state that the information and particulars given above are true to the
best of my knowledge and belief. I also declare that this matter is not
previously filed with this commission nor is pending with any Court or tribunal
or authority.
Place: Bangalore Signature
of Complainant
Date: 26 Nov 2013
of Mr. SHARAD YESHWANT SAVUR dated 26th NOVEMBER 2013
|
S No.
|
Action
|
Date
|
|
1
|
Application mailed to CPIO
By RTI Online
By Speed Post
|
08 Sep 13
10 Sep 2013
|
|
2
|
Application received by CPIO
|
Not Known
|
|
3
|
Date of receipt of letter for paying charges
|
Not Applicable
|
|
4
|
Date of remitting charges to CPIO
|
10 Sep 2013 with
original application
|
|
5
|
Date of decision of CPIO
|
Not Received in
Post
|
|
6
|
Date of receipt of decision of CPIO by appellant
|
Not Applicable
|
|
7
|
First Appeal mailed to FAA on
|
17 Oct 2013
|
|
8
|
Date of receipt of appeal by FAA
|
22 Nov 13
|
|
9
|
Date(s) of personal hearing by FAA
|
Not Applicable
|
|
10
|
Date of decision of FAA
|
18 Nov 13
|
|
11
|
Date of receipt of decision of FAA by appellant
|
25 Nov 13 (5 pm)
|
|
12
|
Date of Complaint
|
Original date: 25 Nov 13
Revised on 26 Nov 13
due to receipt of Order of Appellate Authority on 25 Nov 13
(copies without enclosures sent to CPIO & FAA)
|
|
13
|
Date of mailing copy of Complaint to CPIO & FAA
|
25 Nov 2013 (12.11
pm)
& revised copy
on 26 Nov 13
|
|
14
|
Date of mailing Complaint to CIC
|
26 Nov 2013
|
Place: Bangalore - 560038
Date: 26 Nov 2013
Signature of
complainant
Enclosures: as stated
No comments:
Post a Comment