9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 1015X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ince no inquiry was pending and hence, the question of investigation on inquiry does not arise. The Commission further observes that though the CPIO has provided misleading and incorrect information to the appellant there was no malafide intent on the part of the CPIO. In view of this, the CPIO is cautioned to be more careful in future, so that such lapses do not recur. The CPIO is also directed t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... instituting the said enquiry/investigation. (ii) Intimate the name and designation of the Officer, who has ordered the aforesaid enquiry/investigation and name and designation of the Competent Authority. (iii) Intimate the date of the initiation of the enquiry/investigation in question. (iv) Provide the subject / purpose of the enquiry/investigation. (v) Intimate the name ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ding investigation and has confirmed this fact in his order dated 2711.2012. Hearing: 3. The appellant Shri R.K. Jain and the respondent Shri Darshan, CPIO were in present in person. 4. The appellant submitted that the information sought by him was denied to him as the CPIO vide letter dated 04.10.2012 informed the appellant that the information sought cannot be provided as the matter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ore officer and that the disciplinary proceedings started only on 13.03.2013. The appellant has also alleged that the action of the CPIO of not providing the information was deliberate and that the same was vitiated with the malafide intent to obstruct the information sought. 5. The respondent submitted that a letter dated 13.06.2012 was sent by CESTAT, New Delhi to Bangalore Commissionarate st ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y was pending and hence, the question of investigation on inquiry does not arise. The Commission further observes that though the CPIO has provided misleading and incorrect information to the appellant there was no malafide intent on the part of the CPIO. In view of this, the CPIO is cautioned to be more careful in future, so that such lapses do not recur. The CPIO is also directed to ensure that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
