JS RAWAT

Most respectfully I beg to submit in continuation to my earlier submission dated June 09, 2012 that I have received letter No. 11/5/2012-IR (Vol.II) dated 05/06/2012, from Mr. R.K. Girdhar, Deputy Secretary of Ministry of Personnel P. G & Pensions, which is enclosed for your kind perusal.

2. The authorities concerned are not only providing me misleading information time and again on the applicability of section 19 (7) of the RTI Act, 2005 but also of Section 23, either to cover-up the violation of Section 19 (6) and Section 19 (10) by the CIC, or extending undue favour to the Appellate Authority of IIT Kanpur.
3. The authorities concerned are still unable to identify the specific scope of the section 19 (7), confined to admittance of the second appeal for hearing in accordance with the compliance of sub-section 2, 3 and 6 of Section 19 of the RTI Act. Section 19 (6) of the RTI Act which is exclusively related to take decision on the first appeal of the appellant by the Appellate Authority within prescribed time limit. The decision of the Commission would be final only in respect of admitting the appeal beyond prescribed period of 90 in the case of appellant under section 19 (3) and 30 days but not beyond 45 days in the case of first Appellate Authority under Section 19 (6) of the RTI Act.
4. My second appeal is disposed of by the Appellate Authority beyond 45 days, hence not allowed to be admitted under Section 19 (6) by the Commission under the explicit provisions of section 19 (7) of the RTI Act but the authorities of D o P. T are arbitrarily covering-up the said violation of the RTI Act of the Commission by arbitrary interpretation of the said section.
5. The authorities of D o P. T have arrived at such an unwarranted finding of Section 19 (7) mainly because of ignorance of Section 19 (10) of the RTI Act, 2005, as reflected from the said arbitrary finding.
6. Section 19 (10) of the RTI Act exclusively relates for taking decision on the second appeal of the appellant in accordance with such procedure as may be prescribed.
7. The procedure prescribed for deciding the second appeal is covered under Rule 5 of the CIC (Appeal Procedure) Rules, 2005, made by the Central Government. The CIC has completely overruled the said Rules at the time of hearing of my second appeal. On the contrary my said appeal is completely ignored or destroyed by the Information Commissioner, as explicitly reflected from his decision dated 7th January 2009.
8. The authorities of D o P. T are inadvertently clubbing Section 19 (7), which relates only to admittance of second appeal for hearing by the CIC, with Section 19 (10) of the RTI Act, exclusively related for taking decision on the second appeal, provided the second appeal and the decision of the First Appellate Authority are conforming the prescribed time limit, laid down under sub-section 3 and 6 of Section 19 of the RTI Act respectively.
9. It is evident from the foregoing facts, the CIC has blatantly violated sub-section 6 of Section 19 by considering the time barred disposal of my first appeal by the Appellate Authority beyond extended statutory period of 45 days and without providing me any information, requested for under Section 6 (3) of the RTI Act. In view of the same, the CIC would have taken decision on the basis of my second appeal and after hearing me alone.

Encl: One
Yours faithfully,


(J. S. RAWAT)

Copy forwarded through email to:-

1. Shri R.K. Girdhar, Under Secretary, D o P. T, Ministry of Personnel, P. G & Pensions, North Block, New Delhi -110001.in in continuation to earlier submission dated June 20, 2012. You are requested to get reconciled the invalid directive of the authority concerned in terms of Section 19 (10) of the RTI Act, 2005.

2. Hon’ble Chief Vigilance Commissioner, C.V.C., Satarkata Bhawan, A-Block, G P O Complex, INA, New Delhi - 110023 with reference to my complaint, already registered vide registration No. 15759/2012.

3. Hon’ble S. Mishra, Chief Information Commissioner, CIC, Room No. 306, 2nd Floor, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi, 110066 in continuation to my endorsement dated 09/06/2012.