CIC/SS/A/2013/000544. Case: Shri Karim Baksh Vs South Eastern Coalfields Ltd.. Competition Commision of India

Case NumberCIC/SS/A/2013/000544
JudgesSushma Singh, Information Commissioner
IssueRight to Information Act
Judgement DateNovember 18, 2013
CourtCompetition Commision of India

Court Information Competition Commision of India
Judgment Date 18-Nov-2013
Party Details Shri Karim Baksh Vs South Eastern Coalfields Ltd.
Case No CIC/SS/A/2013/000544
Judges Sushma Singh, Information Commissioner
Acts Right to Information Act


Sushma Singh, Information Commissioner

1. Shri Karim Baksh hereinafter called the Appellant has filed the present Appeal dated 4.02.2013 before the Commission against the Respondent namely South Eastern Coalfields, Bilaspur. The Appellant was present in-person in the hearing whereas from the Respondent side CPIO-Shri R. Ulaganathan [GM (IC)] and APIO-Shri A.K. Pandey [Sr. Manager (F)] were present in the hearing. The Appellant through the RTI application dated 08.02.2012 sought information regarding calculation of dates/period for salary payment process of daily rated employees. The Appellant specifically asked 6 queries in respect of the said matter.

2. CPIO vide letter no: SICL/BSP/CPIO/2012/11608/4330 dated 5.03.2012 replied to the appellant on the basis of information received from Deemed PIO. The CPIO provided the information for query No: 6 and also informed the Appellant that query No: 1 to 5 of RTI application relates to Finance Department and same may be obtained from there.

3. Aggrieved with the reply of the CPIO, the Appellant filed a first appeal dated 24.04.2012 before the FAA. However, not satisfied with the order of the FAA, the Appellant has filed the present appeal before the Commission in which he states that incomplete information has been provided to him by the CPIO.

4. During hearing before the Commission, the Appellant submits that incomplete information has been provided to him by the CPIO in relation to his RTI application. Appellant also submits that the salary of 15 days is pending with the Respondent organization as it was not paid to him. On the other hand, the CPIO submits that after receipt of Notice for Hearing from the Commission, once again letter No: 1692 and 1793 dated 7.09.2013 & 24.09.2013 respectively were sent to the Deemed PIO i.e. GM (P & A) and GM (Fin) to provide the required information to CPIO so that the same could be sent to the Appellant. In response, the CPIO received information from GM (Fin) stating that the required information is pertaining to a period 23 to 27 yrs old and no office order/circular is available and it may be available with administrative department. CPIO further submits that 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