Whispers Forum

In response to a request for information pertaining to the appointment of outsourced manpower, the PIO requested the appellant to visit the office for inspection. Thereafter, the appellant conducted the inspection and the relevant documents were given by the PIO on 29.11.2021. The CIC concurred with the submissions of the PIO that the copies of all the complaints received by the respondent’s office cannot be provided as it may contain certain personal information, therefore, it is barred from disclosure under section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. The CIC also concurred with the submissions of the PIO that the documents submitted by the firm during the tender process cannot be put in public domain as it is third party information. The CIC held that the copy of the contract containing terms and conditions of the tender once finalized can be provided to the appellant as it is not barred from disclosure under Section 8(1)(d) of the RTI Act.
Comments
A copy of the contract containing terms and conditions of the tender can be provided after the award of the tender subject to taking recourse to the provisions of Section 10 of the RTI Act, 2005. All the sensitive and personal information, if any, should be severed after giving a notice to the third party.
Citation: Rajat Narayan v. Central Road Research Institute (CRRI), File no.: - CIC/CRRID/A/2022/615059; Date of Decision: 15/03/2023
Dr Anuradha Verma (dranuradhaverma@yahoo.co.in) is a RTI Consultant currently working with IIM Visakhapatnam. She has co-authored the books, RTI Right to Information - Law and Practice and PIO’s Guide to RTI. She offers consultancy on RTI matters and Third party audit. Her other articles can be read at the website of RTI Foundation of India at the link www.rtifoundationofindia.com

The Appellant sought information with reference to sanction of his permanent TA claim which appeared to have been restricted to 2 AC train fare. He asked for a copy of authority for restricting his claim to 2nd AC train fare instead of restricting the same to shortest route of his entitlement i.e. Air Travel. He further demanded a copy of authority for deduction of taxi fare of Rs. 3060/- (Rs.1560 and Rs.1500) against the said TA claim. After going through reply of CPIO, the CIC observed that it is the lowest air fare that has been taken into account and not the train fare as stated by the appellant in his second appeal. During the hearing, he explained that the restriction is partly based on the air fare and partly on the train fare. The CIC held that though it appears that what was sanctioned was as per the appellant’s entitlement, still point no 1 needs to be properly clarified to the appellant. The second point regarding the taxi fare has been explained properly in terms of the appellant’s entitlement.
Comments
The quantum of money spent on a CIC hearing would be more that the disputed TA entitlement in this case. It is often seen that deductions are made in the TA bill by the account departments without clarifying the reasons for the same. The claimant is left on his own to decipher the reasons for the trimming of the claim.
Citation: Prathipati Bhanu Prasad v. O/o the Controller of Defence Accounts (Border Roads), File no.: CIC/CGDAC/A/2022/610238; Date of Decision: 16/03/2023
Dr Anuradha Verma (dranuradhaverma@yahoo.co.in) is a RTI Consultant currently working with IIM Visakhapatnam. She has co-authored the books, RTI Right to Information - Law and Practice and PIO’s Guide to RTI. She offers consultancy on RTI matters and Third party audit. Her other articles can be read at the website of RTI Foundation of India at the link www.rtifoundationofindia.com

If calling someone thief is defamatory, what about labelling someone as Mir Jafar and many other objectionable names and titles. Some think that more they abuse their opponents more kudos they will get from the bosses in the party. The language used by some is so horrible crossing all boundaries of decency good manners and civilized behaviour. It shocks when a few ministers or ex ministers and party seniors attack an opposition leader in such aggressive manner and bad language. Is this the democracy we are proud of .Lace your attack with lies ,lies and more lies ,make it more and more bitter to demoralise the other person so that mentally and physically he becomes unfit to challenge you. Democracy to survive needs not only educated people but men and women of character who respect their opponents.
Aarti Khosla