PIO: Information provided free of cost & the Complainant is satisfied - Complainant submitted that he was forced to sign an undertaking stating his satisfaction - CIC: There is no ground to accept that the undertaking was signed under pressure; PIO warned
The Complainant has sought the following information regarding hiring of technical staff for manning & operation of MES Complaint Cell at OMQ, SMQ and 90-B Power House at AF Station Srinagar and Manning & Operations of DG Sets Installation of standby power supply at 1-Wing AF Station Srinagar:
- As per the tender documents, the staff to be hired were supposed to be class X Passed and ITI diploma holder. Whether all the staff hired has the requisite qualification especially those hired by JE Mr. Ansari?
- Provide a list of all the appointees, with name, parentage and address.
- Provide copies of educational certificates of their qualifications.
- And others related information
Grounds for filing Complaint
The CPIO did not provide the desired information.
Submissions made by Complainant and Respondent during Hearing:
The complainant submitted that he is not satisfied with the reply as the same was delayed and therefore, photocopying charges are not applicable. The CPIO submitted that on 29.02.2020 the complainant was given all the required information free of cost and he had submitted an undertaking that he is satisfied with the information. The complainant submitted that he was forced to sign stating his satisfaction.
Based on a perusal of the record, it was noted that the CPIO had claimed photocopying charges after the lapse of 30 days of filing of RTI application. As per the complainant the RTI application was delivered on 16.05.2018 and therefore the reply dated 19.06.2018 is delayed. The CPIO’s representative submitted during the hearing that information was already given on 29.02.2020 free of cost and the complainant is unnecessarily misrepresenting the facts.
The Commission observed that there is no ground to accept that the undertaking was signed under pressure. The CPIO is however issued a warning for not providing the documents free of cost on time and claiming charges despite the delay in replying.
The complaint is disposed of accordingly.
Vanaja N. Sarna
Citation: Raashed Ashraf Rather v. Military Engineer Services in File no.: CIC/UTOJK/C/2020/114700/IAIRF, Date of Decision: 03/11/2021