TWO OPEN LETTERS SENT TO CIC ON 22.3.2013 ON NON-ACTION
AFTER ISSUING OF SHOW CAUSE NOTICE
SPEED POST
Sri Satayanand Mishra ji,
Hon'ble Chief Information Commissioner,
Central Information Commission,
August Kranti Bhavan, New Delhi-110066.
Date: 22.3.2013.
In-acton by Shri Basant Seth, CIC after issuing the "Show Cause Notice" to the CPIO, Deptt. of Posts.
Ref: Order of Shri Basant Seth, IC No. CIC/LS/A/2011/002377/BS/ 0668 dated 23.8.2012.
Respected Sir,
Shri Basant Seth, Information Commissioner issued a show cause notice to the CPIO of Deptt. of Posts and the CPIO and Assistant Director, Deptt. of Posts sent his reply on 24.9.2012. I procured copy of the reply by the CPIO by filing an RTI application and found the reply unsatisfactory, vague, incomplete and gross misrepresentation of facts. I, therefore, sent rejoinder in the first week of December, 12 to Shri Basant Seth in Dec. 2012 praying to consider the facts mentioned in my rejoinder and to give me an opportunity to attend to present my submissions if any hearing is granted to the CPIO on the reply of 'Show Cause Notice'. On not getting any reply, I have to file another RTI application and inspected the file on 5th February, 13 at CIC but there was nothing in the file suggesting that Shri Seth, IC has taken any step to dispose the case and reply of "Show Cause Notice". My RTI's queries on the present status of the case, whether the CPIO will be granted any hearing and if yes, whether I will also be given an opportunity to attend the same were not replied treating them not covered under the RTI Act.
2. After that, I have not received any communication in this case for the last over three months from the filing of rejoinder. The silence of the Information Commissioner on this is fishy I have a lurking suspicion that he is waiting this case to die in due course in the absence of any action.
3. In the past, in some cases, this happened when Smt. Sushma Singh, IC reverted back my two appeals against the EOW, Delhi Police for not disclosing the report of Forensic Lab for the veracity of software used in the DDA draw to the FAA over two years back and till now, I have not heard anything about that and if you want, I can search case numbers form the old records. Though it was a fit case for filing an appeal in the High Court but I could not do so due to the constraint of time, money and expertize.
4. I, therefore, pray for taking an appropriate action in the matter of show cause notice otherwise issuing of 'Show Cause Notice' will only be a formality, an exercise in futile and an eye wash raising suspicions that everything is not in order at some registries. I request you to inquire into the reasons for the silence of the Information Commissioners after issuing the "Show Cause Notices" or reminding back cased to the FAA so that the applicants faith do not shake in the CIC.
5. I pray your honour to collect the information from the registry of different Information Commissioners about the number of complaints and appeals which were not finally decided after issuing the show cause notices or having remanding back to the Public Authority and have been closed without proper disposal.
Yours faithfully,
(Mahendra Kumar Gupta)
(Free Lance Journalist)
(Jt. Secy. and Media Advisor, Dwarka Forum and RTI volunteer)
Phone: 9810550172.
Encl:
1. CIC's decision dated 23.8.2012.
2. Reply of CPIO.
3. Copy of rejoinder sent to CIC.
Copy to-
2. Shri Shailesh Gandhi, former Central Information Commissioner
3. Humjanengen website – humjanengen.google.groups.
4. Dwarka Forum website.
5. Facebook pages of
a). RTI,
b). RTI and Anti-corruption,
c). Kanooni Manch and
d). Self face-book page.
e). Citizen Journalist – IBN-7.
SPEED POST
Sri Basant Seth, Central Information Commissioner,
CIC, Old JNU Campus, New Delhi-110067.
&nb sp; Date: 22.3.2013.
Sub: Non-compliance of CIC Order by the Deptt. of Posts – (Order No. CIC/LS/A/2011/002377/BS/0668 dated 23.8.2013 issued by you and No. CIC/DS/A/2009/000026 dated 27.1.2010 by Smt. Mrs. Deepak Sandhu, Central Information Commissioner.
Respected Sir,
In the aforesaid order dated 23.8.2012, your honour has directed that the order of the Commission in appeal No, CIC/DS/A/2009/000026 dated 27.01.2010 should be placed before the Secretary, Deptt. of Posts for taking appropriate action; particularly on the issue of simplifying the cumbersome procedure for claiming refund/ compensation for delay/ loss of speed post and loading the same on the website.
2. Smt. Deepak Sandhu, Information Commissioner also directed that the complainant does not have to make one or more trips to the post office to make his complaint, to follow up on the complaint and to take his refund.
3. I mention that the Deptt. of Posts does not take the CIC seriously which is evident that the order of Smt. Deepak Sandhu has not been complied even after over three years, CPIO was not present during the hearing of my case before your honour and sent a very junior employee to represent him. Moreover, the customers have to make many trips to claim the refund which is evident from the following facts:
a). That I applied for the refund on 21.1.2013 to the CPMG, Deptt. of Posts, New Delhi my speed post-booked on 10.1.2013 under booking No. ED817625529IN reached on 15.1.13 while as per delivery norms, it should have reached within two days. For this, I also delivered an application by hand to the Post Master, Shakarpur, Delhi on Ist Feb. 2013 but I have not received the refund so far even after two months period. Copies of both the applications, duly delivered, are enclosed for your ready reference.
b). I sent another speed post to HUDA, Gurgaon on 19.12.2013 under booking No. ED804767055IN and now it has been informed that it is not traceable in the records of SMHO. (vide DoP letter No. RTI/NDCD/255/12-13 dated 15.3.13). Now I have been informed that the customer has to submit a claim application in the prescribed form along with the Original Booking Slip to the department but the form has not been sent to me. The RTI reply dated 15.3.2013 by the Deptt. of Posts also inform that the amount of compensation payable will be single rate of speed postage charges excluding service charges as prescribed by the Deptt. but on the contrary the website of the Deptt states that for loss, compensation of double of the Speed Post charges or RS. 1000/- whichever is less is payable. This is some sort of misrepresentation of facts on the website and a copy of the relevant page of website is enclosed. I state that my Speed Post contained an IPO of Rs. 50/- favouring HUDA but the same will not be refunded to me. This shows that the cumbersome procedure for claiming refund/ compensation for delay/ loss of speed post has not been simplified as directed by Mrs. Deepak Sandhu, Central Information Commissioner any by your honour. Moreover, procedure of claiming compensation has not been uploaded on the website, as directed by the CIC as is evident from the copy of the relevant page of the website. A copy of the letter sent to HUDA by speed post is also enclosed from which it is clear that an IPO of Rs. 50/- has also accompanied the letter.
4. I therefore state that it is of no use to issue directions if these are not implemented by the Public Authority.
5. I pray to initiate the contempt proceedings against the Deptt. of Posts for not implementing the aforesaid decisions of the Central Information Commission.
Yours faithfully,
(Mahendra Kumar Gupta)
Email – mkgrti@gmail.com
Encl.: Copies of-
1. Applications for refund as referred in Para 4.
2. Website page. 3. HUDA RTI.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.