Can CVC give a second stage advice in matters relating to LTC or TA?
The appellant claimed that the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) had issued a circular stating that second stage advice need not be sought from it in matters relating to irregularities in claiming LTC or TA; still the CVC had entertained a request from the Department concerned and had offered its second stage advice in her case. The appellant filed an application under the Right to Information (RTI) Act seeking the reasons for making such an exception in her own case. The Public Information Officer (PIO) and the First Appellate Authority (FAA) held that what the appellant had sought was not information but explanation from the CVC about its action in a particular matter. The respondent pointed out during the hearing that there was no such circular issued by the CVC.
The Central Information Commission (CIC) noted that although the appellant had not clearly stated which record or document she was exactly seeking, it is clear that what she was seeking was a circular which might have listed the exceptions in which second stage advice could still be sought in such cases. The Commission perused the original CVC circular and observed that it clearly implies that in such matters ordinarily a second stage advice of the CVC may not be sought but seeking such advice is not completely ruled out and that it would depend on the gravity of the case and the judgment of the Department/Organisation concerned and the CVC. The Commission also held that the action of the department in referring the matter to the CVC for second stage advice and the subsequent decision on the part of the CVC to offer its second stage advice must have been made in a certain context. The appellant has the right to know the context in which such a decision was taken.
View of CIC
The Central Information Commission (CIC) directed the PIO to furnish the photocopy of the relevant file noting in which the CVC decided to entertain the request of the CGDA, Ministry of Defense for second stage advice in her case and offered one. The Commission also directed the PIO to provide a copy of the circular, if any, which might provide the exceptions in which a second stage advice could still be sought from the CVC in matters of allegations of irregularities in LTC claims.
Citation: Mrs. Rukhsana Shaheen Khan v. Central Vigilance Commission in File No.CIC/SM/A/2011/001845
RTI Citation : RTIFI/2012/CIC/562
Click here to view original RTI order of Court / Information Commission