File Nos. CIC/SH/C/2014/000130, 000519, 000257, 000520 and 000349. Case: Anurag Kumar Vs Central Public Information Officer. Central Information Commission

Case NumberFile Nos. CIC/SH/C/2014/000130, 000519, 000257, 000520 and 000349
CounselFor Appellant: Party-in-Person and For Respondents: Sudhakar Kushwaha, Senior Manager
JudgesSharat Sabharwal, Information Commissioner
IssueCode of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) - Order XII Rule 3, Section 80
Judgement DateJanuary 09, 2015
CourtCentral Information Commission


Sharat Sabharwal, Information Commissioner

1. These files contain complaints in respect of the RTI applications dated 8.12.2013 (File No. CIC/SH/C/2014/000130), 24.7.2014 (File No. CIC/SH/C/2014/000519), 10.3.2014 (File No. CIC/SH/C/2014/000257), 22.8.2014 (File No. CIC/SH/C/2014/000520) and 23.5.2014 (File No. CIC/SH/C/2014/000349) filed by the Complainant seeking information in the context of disciplinary proceedings against him and the punishment imposed on him. Not satisfied with the response of the Respondents, he has filed complaints in all the five cases to the CIC.

2. The Complainant submitted that the Respondents have not been providing the information sought by him in his RTI applications. In response to our query, he stated that he has filed around 130 RTI applications. He further submitted that the Respondents either state that the information has already been provided or provide information, which is different from the information sought by him.

3. In response to our query, it was stated during the hearing that the Complainant was dismissed from the service of the bank in 2006. Subsequently, pursuant to an order of the High Court, the Respondents passed a fresh dismissal order in 2013.

4. The Respondents submitted that a good deal of information has been provided to the Complainant in response to his various RTI applications. They referred to our order No. CIC/VS/C/2013/000430/SH, CIC/SH/C/2014/000024, CIC/SH/A/2014/000011, CIC/SH/A/2014/000184, CIC/SH/C/2014/000025, CIC/SH/A/2014/000244 and CIC/SH/A/2014/000195 dated 30.5.2014, in which we directed the CPIO to facilitate an inspection of all the relevant records, regarding the departmental proceedings, by the Complainant and, after such inspection, give him photocopies of up to 200 pages of the inspected records, desired by him, free of cost. The Respondents submitted that the inspection took place on 2.7.2014 and all the relevant records available with the Respondents were shown to the Complainant. After the inspection, the Complainant recorded that he had duly inspected the records for approximately eight hours from 11.00 a.m. to 7.00 p.m. without any pressure or hindrance and to his full satisfaction and taken copies of 904 pages, out of which 200 pages were given to him free of cost and the remaining on payment of the prescribed charges. In response to our query, the Complainant acknowledged having recorded a certificate to the above effect after the...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT