9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (4) TMI 461X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Facts : Appellant Dr. Anand Akhila, scientist residing in Lucknow applied to PIO DS Bedi on October 26, 2005 asking for inspection of records related to his assessment promotion. To this he received a reply on December 5, 2005 stating that the request could not be allowed as it was exempted u/s 8(1) of the Act. Possibly realising that such a response was in violation of Section 7(8) of the Act, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is no representative of CSIR present. Nor has that public authority sent any comments in response to the Commission's orders of March 30, 2006 asking for comments by 19-4-2006. The appellant seeks : (1) Information on marks awarded to him by each committee member, without disclosing their names (2) The threshold mark fixed by the board for promotion (3) Permission to inspect the records related ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n fifteen days from the issue of this decision. (2) The PIO Dr DS Bedi seems to have had no reasonable ground for delay in sending the brief and slipshod response to the application of the appellant. The complaint of mala fide intent has not been denied. He will thus show cause within ten working days u/s 20(1) of the Act as to why he should not pay the prescribed penalty for delaying his respons ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
