RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT -ITPO

 

Details of Appeal/Decision of First Appellate Authority for the year 2013-14 under RTI Act

Sl.
No.

ID No. and Name of the applicant

Ground of Appeal

Decision of First Appellate Authority/remarks

1.

No.ITPO/PIC/Appeal/02/05/2013
Shri Awdhesh Kumar, New Delhi

I hereby pray kindly to peruse the News-paper clipping of “The Times of India” dated 8th January 2010 in regard to the decision of CIC for disclosure of similar information that have been sought by the undersigned at Point No.1 (iii) & (iv), the placed below copy of referred News-paper clipping is self- explanatory.
Accordingly, the information sought at Point No. 2 as to inspect the File No. 13-ITPO 13) Vig./98 also undoubtedly qualify for its inspection as the undersigned is the affected party, against whom serious false allegation of bribery etc. were framed under conspiracy which caused unbearable mental agonies for years together and dire lifelong illness throwing me at the edge of death.

The First Appellate Authority, ITPO after having perused the RTI Application, information furnished by DPIO, ITPO and first appeal of the applicant./appellant, has ruled that the following information/reply may be provided  to the appellant:
Point no.1(iv)
Copies of Annual Property Return is a personal information of third party, disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest and no larger public interest is involved in disclosure of such information, therefore, it cannot be provided.  Hence, the information furnished by DPIO, ITPO was justified.
For Point No.2: The appellant may be allowed inspection of relevant file  on a  mutually convenient date and time.

2.

No.ITPO/PIC/Appeal/03/06/2013
Shri Ramesh Chandra, New Delhi

Reference my RTI application dated 5th March 2013.  The reply I got is very vague and casual in nature (copy of the same is enclosed for your kind perusal).  The Administration Division is deliberately avoiding to provide the necessary documents and they have not done any exercise for redressal of my grievances

You are once again requested to kindly provide me the above documents within a week’s time as the matter has already been listed for final hearing on 29th April 2013 before the Hon’ble Chairman, National Commission for SC, where these documents are to be submitted.

The First Appellate Authority, ITPO after having perused the RTI Application, reply furnished by DPIO, ITPO and first Appeal of the applicant/appellant has ruled that following point-wise information/ documents, may be furnished to the appellant:

  1. Copy (one page) of Certificate of Registration is enclosed.
  2. Ex-TFAI was formed on 01.03.1977 upon merger of three Organisations viz. Directorate of Exhibitions & Commercial Publicity, India International Trade Fair Organisation; and Indian Council of Trade Fairs and Exhibitions.  The RRs of Organisation were first approved in May 1979.  Thereafter, they were modified on 24.10.1981 and 28.07.1988 and amended from time to time.  Copies (32 pages) of RRs for the different posts, as requested, from 1979 onwards are enclosed.
  3. No such information in compiled form is available being more than 20 years old.
  4. Information, as sought by the appellant/applicant, is not available in the compiled form.  However, seniority list(8 page) from 01.03.1982 to 06.05.1992 having relevant information is enclosed.  Regarding his query for posts available for DP/DR and SC/ST Quota etc.,  no such information in compiled form is available. However, he may  refer to seniority list.
  5. Details (8 page) of information as available is enclosed.
  6. Copies of available Promotion orders (15 page) of Shri I.D. Agarwal, are enclosed.
  7. Shri I.D. Agarwal was promoted as Sr. Steno on 04.08.1977 on seniority cum fitness basis. Details/Roaster (8 pages) w.e.f. 1977  are enclosed.
  8. No period has been specified. However, the list(one page) from 1982 to 1989 is enclosed.
  9. Applicant may refer to reply/RRs given at point No.2 above.  Educational Qualification: Not applicable. Length of Service short by 11 months. Photocopies of certificate of his qualification cannot be provided being personal information.  His qualification is MA from Annamalai University, May 1999.
  10. DPC proceedings are confidential in nature and contain personal information of other candidates, such as ACR gradings, etc.  The applicant is also not one of the aspirants and third party in this case, hence, cannot be provided.
  11. Copy (2 page) of Office Order No. Admn./1266/2006 dated 27.09.2006 are enclosed.   Copy (2 page) of Statements are enclosed.
  12. No such information in compiled form is available being more than 28 years old.
  13. No such information is available.

3.

No.ITPO/PIC/ Appeal/01/10/2013
Shri R.L. Gupta, New Delhi

The applicant/appellant, being unsatisfied with the information furnished to him, in respect of point 8 to 11 and 13, has submitted first Appeal dated 16.04.2013 (PUC) before the FAA stating that:
8) I have not sought any opinion in my information.  I asked for only name(s) of other officers, who were involved in reduction of space rent and the details of disciplinary action initiated against each of the officers involved. 
However, in spite of providing me names of the officers involved, I have only been provided a copy of the note sheet.  I may please be provided specific names of the officers involved and details of disciplinary action initiated against each officer, as sought by me.
9) Since the enquiry against me has already been completed and penalty imposed on me, I have the right under the RTI Act 2005 to get all the relevant documents pertaining to my case to defend my case.
The matter pertains to myself only and hence I am entitled to get all the noting of relevant files.  Moreover the information does not pertain to Secrecy Act even the Parliamentary proceedings are under ambit of RTI Act.
10) Under the RTI Act 2005, information sought is to be provided within the stipulated time of 30 days.  In this case, it is beyond 45 days of the stipulated period that the required information has not been furnished to me.  The information sought may please be provided to me without further delay.
11) A period of more than one year has been passed after filling the appeal with Appellate Authority.  How much more time is required.  I have filled number of reminders dated 10.4.12, 20.1.13 & 2.1.13 to Appellate Authority with the request to set aside the penalty and grant me personal hearing the matter.
Under the RTI Act 2005, information sought is to be provided within the stipulated time of 30 days.  In this case, it is beyond 45 days of the stipulated period that the required information has not been furnished to me.  The information sought may please be provided to me without further delay.  I need copies of the documents to defend my case.
13) Copy of the final Audit Report showing the causes of alleged loss has not been provided.  The details of expenditure are different in three documents provided to me.  It is, therefore, requested to provide me the actual figures of the expenditure and revenue/income of Indian Trade Exhibition, Moscow 2003.

The First Appellate Authority, ITPO after having perused the RTI Application, information furnished by DPIO, ITPO and first Appeal of the applicant/appellant has observed that following information in respect of point No.8 to 11 and 13, may be furnished to the appellant:

Point 8: Shri H.S. Madan, GM(Retd.), Shri D.S. Chadha, DGM(Retd) were charge sheeted on various articles of charges including fixing of rentals.
Point 9:    Vigilance file, notings being confidential in nature bearing references/linkages to various aspects of investigation and recording of comments at various aspects of hierarchy are held as trust. Since no larger public interest warrants disclosure of information, it qualifies for protection from disclosure  u/s 8(1)(e) of the RTI Act, 2005.  Hence, the information provided by PIO was justified.

Point10: Copy of letter (1page) No.0506/SKC/73/59149 dated 12.6.2007 addressed to Dy.CVO, ITPO, New Delhi.
Point 11: Appeal is under submission to Appellate Authority.
Point13: The applicant had not sought the copy of Audit Report in the RTI application dated 24.01.2013.   This being his fresh point, cannot be considered at the appellate stage.  Under the RTI Act,                                                                                                                           examining of appeal is to be confined only to the issues raised in the RTI Application.
examining of appeal is to be confined only to the issues raised in the RTI Application.

.

4.

No.ITPO/PIC/Appeal/03/03/2013
Varinder Singh, Ludhiana

श्रीमान जी, Point 5,6,7 का जवाब मैंने आई टी पी ओ से मांगा था । और  आई टी पी ओ के अधिकारी  एन एस आई सी  के सम्बंधित लिख  जवाब नहीं भेज रहे । इसमें जितने stand booking  आई टी पी ओ के जरिये गये वहां Manager Head ITPO थे space  आई टी पी ओ ने ली, तो जवाब भी  आई टी पी ओ ने ही देना है । यह  एन एस आई सी   सम्बंध लिख जवाब नहीं दिया । इनकी लिस्ट  आई टी पी ओ के पास थी । वहां stand  की  पहचान  आई टी पी ओ की थी । जो गया नहीं गया  आई टी पी ओ incharge था । इसलिए जो  stand का पैसा  आई टी पी ओ को मिला सबसे,  एन एस आई सी   ने भी  आई टी पी ओ को दिया । तो RTI  में सूचना  आई टी पी ओ की बनती है । इस लिए  आप से निवेदन है कि मुझे 5,6, 7  Point का जवाब  एन एस आई सी  से नहीं आई टी पी ओ से लेकर दिया जाये

आई टी पी ओ के प्रथम अपीलेट प्राधिकारी द्वारा आर टी आई आवेदन पत्र, आई टी पी ओ के उप जन सूचना प्राधिकारी  द्वारा दी गई जानकारी और आवेदन/अपीलकर्ता की प्रथम अपील को पढने के बाद रेखांकित किया कि Point  संख्या 5, 6 एवं 7 के बारे में आई टी पी ओ के बारे में उपलब्ध निम्नलिखित जानकारी अपील कर्ता को भेजी जाए।

5 एवं 6 :  एन एस आई ने अपने12 संघटकों के लिये 9-9 वर्ग मीटर के 6(छ:) बूथ बुक कराए थे। 9 वर्ग मीटर के एक बूथ दो कंपनियों को दिया गया था । एन एस आई सी के संघटक भागीदारों की सूची में शामिल किए गए हैं।

7.  ये कागजात हमारे पास उपलब्ध नहीं हैं हमारे पास केवल एन एस आई सी के भागीदारों की सूची है ।

 

5.

No.ITPO/PIC/Appeal/03/15/2013
Shri Banarasi Ram, Delhi

Appeal under RTI Act 2005-Against vide letter no. ITPO/PIC/03/15/2013 dated 17.04.2013.
In the above ref. to say that records mentioned in the above quoted ref. are available in the service book please provide the certified copy of relevant pages of the service book related to promotion order no. & date/pay fixation of Jr. Steno/Sr. Steno/PA to AM (Now DM).

The First Appellate Authority, ITPO after having perused the RTI Application, information furnished by DPIO, ITPO and first Appeal of the applicant/appellant has ruled that following information in respect of point no,. (i) & (ii) may be furnished to the appellant:

  1. NOCs are not available in file/Service Book.
  2. The file of Shri Radhakrishnan is not traceable.

6.

No.ITPO/PIC/Appeal/04/07/2013
Shri N.K. Sethi, New Delhi

  • I had sent a letter on 11.04.2013 addressed to Mr. M.M. Nagpal, DGM & PIO, ITPO seeking certain information under the RTI Act. An attested copy of the same is enclosed.
  • I received a part reply from Mrs. J.L. Kashyap, Dy. PIO on 15.05.2013 vide her letter No.ITPO/PIC/04/07/2013 dated 13.5.2013.  An attested copy of the same is also enclosed.
  • Pointwise comments w.r.t. replies sent by Dy. PIO are as under:

 

a)   There was nothing confidential       which has been severed. The       information asked for in full       form is required under the       RTI        Act in public interest.
b)  No comments.
c)   Although there was no       advertisement      released, still       some notings must have been       made for scrutiny etc. for several applications considered           for empanelment. Copies of such       notings/scrutiny notes and       related correspondence be       given in        public interest.
d)   No comments as such letters/       intimation was not received by       ITPO.
e)   The information asked for may be       compiled by ITPO and given       in public interest.
f)    No comments.
g)  No comments.
h)  Full information asked for may be       given to me in compiled   form.
i)    Information asked for may be       compiled and given to me.

The First Appellate Authority, ITPO after having perused the RTI Application, information furnished by DPIO, ITPO and first Appeal of the applicant/appellant has observed that information furnished by DPIO, ITPO was corresponding to the queries of the appellant and was justified.  Further, he has ruled that following information/documents may be provided to the applicant, against points  a),b), c), e) h) & i):        
a).    I have perused the query which prima facie relate only to M/s Sikri & Co and nothing more remains to be provided. The available information about empanelment of M./s Sikri & Co has already been provided to the Appellant. The     last empanelment was done during 2004-2005.  Anyway, noting portion  pertaining to relevant period in page 1 to 26 available from 2002 onwards be provided to the applicant. However, in case applicant wish to inspect relevant file, he may be allowed. 

b).   As proposed by the Law Division, the applicant may be provided copies (5 pages) of letters dated 9th June, 2004 addressed to different Bar Councils requesting them to circulate information regarding empanelment in ITPO.

  • Additional information has been given at point a & b above. However, the appellant may inspect copies of applications on mutually convenient date and time.

e),h)&i).  The information sought is vague and voluminous in nature.  Moreover, the information sought is not available in the compiled form, as the details are available in scattered manner in more than 400 odd files containing thousands of pages and compiling the information will be a huge task as it will require opening each and every file to compile the information which will disproportionately divert the resources of the Public Authority.   Under the RTI Act, PIO is not supposed to compile the information, as sought by the applicant. The applicant may,  however, inspect the relevant available records on a mutually convenient date and time.

7.

No.ITPO/PIC/Appeal/06/04/2013
Shri Banarasi Ram, Delhi

Appeal against vide letter no.ITPO/PIC/06/04/2013 dated 10.07.2013.

Please refer to above letter dated 10th July, 2013 with regard to letter dated 21.03.2011 is not traceable.  In the connection appellate authority is requested to please see for appropriate immediate action enable to inspection the file.

 

                    

The First Appellate Authority, ITPO after having perused the RTI Application, information furnished by DPIO, ITPO and first Appeal of the applicant/appellant has observed that information furnished by DPIO, ITPO was corresponding to the queries of the appellant raised in RTI application and was justified.  The appellant is seeking action, which is not covered under the ambit of “Information” as defined u/s 2(f) of the RTI Act, 2005.  Under the RTI Act, examining of appeal is to be confined only to the issues raised in the RTI application.    The applicant can only seek information, which already exists in material form with the Public Authority; for taking action in the matter, the appellant may approach to the concerned appropriate authority.

8.

No.ITPO/PIC/Appeal/06/08/2013
Shri Banarasi Ram, Delhi

Appeal against vide letter no. ITPO/PIC/06/08/2013 dated 15.07.2013.

In the above quoted ref. Appellate Authority is requested to please re-examine the case because the case was not processed on merit basis.”

 

The First Appellate Authority, ITPO after having perused the RTI Application, information furnished by DPIO, ITPO and first Appeal of the applicant/appellant has observed that information furnished by DPIO, ITPO was corresponding to the queries of the appellant raised in RTI application and was justified.  The appellant is seeking re-examination of the case, which is not covered under the ambit  of “Information” as defined u/s 2(f) of the RTI Act, 2005.  Under the RTI Act, applicant can only seek information, which already exists in material form with the Public Authority.   For re-examining the case, the appellant may approach to the concerned appropriate authority.  Under the RTI Act, examining of appeal is to be confined only to the issues raised in the RTI application.

9.

No.ITPO/PIC/Appeal/06/10/2013
Shri Banarasi Ram, Delhi

Appeal against vide letter no. ITPO/PIC/06/10/2013 dated 15.07.2013.
Please refer to above quoted ref. with regard to action has not been taken.  In this connection Appellate Authority is requested to look into the matter for the disposal of the request within stipulated period.

The First Appellate Authority, ITPO after having perused the RTI Application, information furnished by DPIO, ITPO and first Appeal of the applicant/appellant and information provided by Vigilance, has ruled thatthe Appellant may be informed that the complaint has been closed.

10.

No.ITPO/PIC/Appeal/07/14/2013
Mrs. Mukta Verma, Delhi

I, Mukta Verma, w/o Shri Santosh Kumar Verma, Manager(Finance) sought the residential address of Shri S.K. Verma, as I am in litigation against my husband in Crime Against Women Cell since March 2013 as several notices were sent to his given address at Ghaziabad (R/o 18, Bihar Nagar, Ghaziabad, (when he served me a legal notice) were returned undelivered with the report “No such man lives in”.  A copy of the legal notice is enclosed for reference.  Thus, I require the exact address of Shri S.K. Verma, Manager(Finance).         
2. He has sent a mail to D.C.P. East Delhi regarding his illness on account of a major surgery of   “Total Hip Replacement”   and wants to attend to C.A.W. Cell at his own whim.  It may kindly be intimated to me.

        • Whether he has informed about the case of litigation against him in C.A.W. Cell.
        • Whether he is on medical leave on the ground of Hip Replacement.  If yes, please provide me the name of hospital and date of surgery.

The First Appellate Authority, ITPO after having perused the RTI Application, information furnished by DPIO, ITPO and first Appeal of the applicant/appellant has observed that information furnished by DPIO, ITPO was corresponding to the queries of the appellant raised in RTI application and was justified.  Regarding residential address, it is reiterated that information being personal information of an individual qualifies for protection from disclosure u/s 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, 2005 and, therefore, cannot be provided.  From the remaining points of appeal, it is observed that issues raised by the appellant is not part of her RTI application and these being fresh points cannot be considered at the appellate stage  Under the RTI Act, examining of appeal is to be confined only to the issues raised in the RTI application

 

11.

No.ITPO/PIC/Appeal/11/04/2013
Shri Banarasi Ram, Delhi

Appeal against vide letter No.ITPO/PIC/11/04/2013 dated 18.12.2013.

In the above quoted ref. I have to state that Shri P.C. Sharma cannot be appointed to Appellate    Authority because Shri Sharma involved in the matter of destroying documents. India’s participation in Hardware show Cologne – as Director India Pavilion and Team Members S/S Tanvir Ahmed and Shri S.N. Bali were proceeded with Director India Pavilion in the publicity Scam one officer from Law Division is involved.

Further it is also added here that Shri Chandi Prasad Maithani submitted note dated 17.10.2013 in ref. to my letter dated 26.06.13, 26.07.13 and 29.07.13 to higher authority.  It is significant to record here that Shri Maithani did not disclose the fact.  Thus, mislead to higher authority and committed misconduct.  Hence appellate authority is requested to look into matter for needful as deemed fit.”

The First Appellate Authority, ITPO after having perused the RTI Application and information furnished by DPIO, ITPO & first Appeal of the applicant/appellant has observed as under:

First part of the appeal is not related to RTI matter. 

Regarding second part of the appeal, the appellant is seeking action to be initiated, which is not covered under the ambit of “Information” as defined u/s 2(f) of the RTI Act, 2005. The information sought was provided by DPIO, ITPO vide letter dated 18.12.2013 to the applicant and was corresponding to the queries raised by him in RTI application and was justified. 

The examining of appeal is to be confined only to the issues raised in the RTI application.    The applicant can only seek information, which already exists in material form with the Public Authority; for initiation/taking any action in the matter, the appellant may approach to the concerned appropriate authority.

 

12.

No.ITPO/PIC/Appeal/11/07/2013
Shri H.P. Sinha, New Delhi

On perusal of reply, it has been found that the detail sought in my RTI application, the point No.4 has not been provided completely.

I am enclosing page No.3 and 8 of the pages supplied to me where the detail of the user person along with vehicle number have not been intimated.

In view of above, you are requested to kindly advice your Information Officer to provide the detail of the same to me or arrange to furnish a certificate that the detail of the user person with their vehicle number is not available in the ITPO so the same fact can be brought to the knowledge of the concerned authority.

The First Appellate Authority, ITPO after having perused the RTI Application, reply furnished by DPIO, ITPO and first Appeal of the applicant/appellant has ruled that following information/ documents, may be furnished to the appellant:
Page 3
Sl. No.6  The sample of parking labels were issued to Security Division. The photocopy (2 page) of receipt  is enclosed for reference please.
Sl.No.8: As per past practice, the parking labels issued to Shri Dalel Singh, General Manager, Fair Services Division II,  for participants including State Govt..  Photocopy (1 page) of requisition is enclosed herewith for reference please.

Sl.No.9 &10: Parking issued to DM(Elec.) which was required for CPWD and for other service agencies.  Photocopy( 3 page)  is enclosed herewith for reference please .

Sl.No.24: 15 regular parking issued to GM(RKS). The photocopy ( 2 page) of the requisition is enclosed.
Page 8
One day parking issued to varius officers/Divisions during IITF ’13.  The photocopies (15 pages) of requisitions are enclosed.
The entry of all parking entered in Computer only and was not made in any register.

13.

No.ITPO/PIC/Appeal/11/08/2013
Shri N. K. Sethi, New Delhi

  1. I had sent an application to Mrs. J.L. Kashyap, Manager & Dy. PIO on 25.11.2013 under the RTI Act.  Requisite fee of Rs.10 by Bank Draft was also sent (a copy is enclosed).
  2. On 27.12.2013, I received a reply from Mr. Mahavir, Dy. PIO that the information will be supplied in month month.  ( A copy of letter No.ITPO/PIC/11/08/2013) dated 26.12.2013 is enclosed.  Please see the portion highlighted).
  3. Now a month has elapsed but the information asked for has not been supplied to me.  Thus, the information solicited is deemed to be refused.
  4. I am filing this First Appeal to you to direct the concerned officers/ officials to supply me the full information asked for now free of cost urgently.

The First Appellate Authority, ITPO after having perused the RTI Application, information furnished by DPIO, ITPO and first Appeal of the applicant/appellant has observed that information/documents has already been furnished/provided to the applicant/appellant by DPIO, ITPO vide letter No. ITPO/PIC/11/08/2013 dated 30.1.2014 and ruled that copy of said letter may be sent again to the appellant/applicant .

 

2898
18/03/2020