2015 (2) TMI 643 - Commission - Indian Laws

Denial of information sought in RTI Act - Information sought regarding Agenda Points and the Minutes of the Meeting dated 20-12-2012 regarding implementation of IS9001 - Denial on the ground that that a meeting of Secretary (PM) and Shri H.K. Sharan had taken place on 20-12-2012, though no formal agenda for the meeting was issued - Held that - On perusal of records the Commission does not see any case of furnishing of incorrect information to the Complainant. The CPIO s reply is factual and correct based on the records. Therefore no penal action is warranted in the present complaint. However, the concerns expressed by Shri R.K. Jain, the Complainant, mentioned hereinabove may be brought to the notice of Dr. Prajapati Trivedi, Secretary Performance Management Division, Cabinet Secretariat, New Delhi. A copy of this order may therefore also be sent to Dr. Prajapati Trivedi for his information. - Decided against Appellant.

Summary

Issues: Allegation of incorrect information provided by CPIO in response to RTI application; Discrepancy in information regarding a meeting's existence on 20-12-2012; Allegations of misuse of position and false statements by an officer.

Allegation of Incorrect Information:
The complaint involved an RTI application seeking specific information regarding a meeting on 20-12-2012. The CPIO initially responded that no records were available for the meeting but later modified the response, stating that a meeting had indeed taken place. The Complainant alleged that the modified response was incorrect and misleading, aimed at shielding an officer. The Complainant presented letters suggesting misuse of position by the officer and false statements made to justify extended stays and official meetings. The Complainant argued that the CPIO's response was factually incorrect, portraying a meeting as a formal one when it was merely a courtesy call.

Discrepancy in Meeting Information:
The Complainant contested the existence of a formal meeting on 20-12-2012, highlighting that it was a courtesy call rather than an official meeting as claimed by the CPIO and the officer. The Complainant provided evidence through letters indicating that the officer misrepresented the nature of the meeting and made false statements to justify actions. The Complainant also accused another official of protecting the officer in question. Additionally, an Office Memorandum was cited, suggesting that the officer's official travels were under scrutiny, leading to directives for prior approval of tours.

Misuse of Position and False Statements:
The Complainant alleged that the officer in question misused his position by undertaking personal journeys under the guise of official tours. Documents presented by the Complainant indicated discrepancies in the officer's statements regarding meetings and extended stays. The Complainant sought appropriate action based on the alleged misuse of position and false representations made by the officer. The CPIO maintained that the information provided was factual and correct based on records, leading to the dismissal of penal action. The Commission decided not to penalize the CPIO but recommended bringing the Complainant's concerns to the attention of the relevant official for further action.