CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi-110066 F.No. CIC/CC/A/2014/000137-YA CIC/CC/A/2014/000138-YA CIC/CC/A/2014/000139-YA CIC/CC/A/2014/000280-YA CIC/CC/A/2014/000281-YA CIC/CC/A/2014/000306-YA CIC/CC/A/2014/000500-YA CIC/CC/A/2014/000669-YA CIC/CC/A/2014/000694-YA CIC/CC/A/2014/000796-YA CIC/CC/A/2014/002564-YA CIC/CC/A/2014/002625-YA CIC/CC/A/2014/002626-YA CIC/CC/A/2014/002635-YA CIC/CC/A/2014/002636-YA CIC/CC/A/2014/002637-YA CIC/CC/A/2014/002638-YA CIC/CC/A/2014/002659-YA CIC/CC/A/2015/001951-YA CIC/CC/A/2015/001953-YA CIC/YA/A/2014/002624-YA CIC/CC/A/2014/000853-YA CIC/CC/A/2014/000854-YA CIC/CC/A/2014/000855-YA CIC/CC/A/2014/000856-YA CIC/CC/A/2014/000857-YA CIC/CC/A/2014/001479-YA CIC/CC/A/2014/001674-YA CIC/CC/A/2014/001687-YA CIC/CC/A/2014/002103-YA CIC/CC/A/2014/002320-YA CIC/CC/A/2014/002321-YA CIC/CC/A/2014/002531-YA CIC/CC/A/2014/002632-YA CIC/CC/A/2014/003038-YA CIC/CC/A/2014/003061-YA CIC/SS/A/2014/000129-YA CIC/CC/A/2015/001998-YA CIC/YA/A/2015/002057 CIC/YA/A/2015/002058 CIC/YA/A/2016/000232 CIC/YA/A/2016/000233 CIC/YA/A/2016/000234 CIC/YA/A/2016/000235 CIC/YA/A/2016/000236 Date of Hearing : 25.07.2016 Date of Decision : 25.07.2016 Appellant/Complainant : Shri Patta Rama Appa Row, Vishakhapatnam Respondent : CPIO, Rashtriya ISPAT Nigam Limited, Vishakhapatnam Through: Mr. K Srinivasa Rao, CPIO
Information Commissioner : Shri Yashovardhan Azad Since both the parties are same in the above mentioned appeals, these appeals are clubbed together for hearing and disposal to avoid multiplicity of the proceedings. Relevant facts emerging from appeal: Case No. RTI filed no. CPIO reply First appeal filed FAA order 0137 21.02.2014 09.05.2014 25.03.2014 No order 0138 19.02.2014 09.07.2014 25.03.2014 No order 0139 19.02.2014 No reply 25.03.2014 No order 0280 24.03.2014 14.05.2014 03.05.2014 No order 0281 24.03.2014 No reply 03.05.2014 No order 0306 02.04.2014 No reply 12.05.2014 No order 0500 11.03.2014 08.04.2014 03.05.2014 No order 0669 21.02.2014 09.05.2014 25.03.2014 No order 0694 19.02.2014 27.03.2014 25.03.2014 No order 0796 09.03.2014 23.06.2014 12.05.2014 No order Case No. RTI filed no. CPIO reply First appeal filed FAA order 2564 31.07.2014 08.10.2014 06.09.2014 No order 2625 31.07.2014 No reply 06.09.2014 No order 2626 27.07.2014 26.08.2014 06.09.2014 No order 2635 31.07.2014 No reply 06.09.2014 No order pass 2636 01.02.2014 05.11.2014 07.08.2014 No order 2637 27.07.2014 No reply 06.09.2014 No order 2638 31.07.2014 No reply 06.09.2014 No order 2 nd appeal filed on 05.08.2014 05.08.2014 05.08.2014 21.08.2014 21.08.2014 20.08.2014 20.08.2014 04.09.2014 04.09.2014 19.08.2014 2 nd appeal filed on 20.11.2014 19.11.2014 19.11.2014 19.11.2014 19.11.2014 19.11.2014 19.11.2014
2659 31.07.2014 No reply 06.09.2014 No order 1951 12.04.2014 No reply 07.08.2014 No order 1953 06.11.2014 No reply 19.12.2014 No order 2624 03.04.2014 23.06.2014 12.05.2014 No order 20.11.2014 27.02.2015 24.02.2015 19.11.2014 CIC/CC/A/2014/000137-YA Vide RTI application dated 21.02.2014, the appellant sought information under 9 points dealing with the following: The period since which 50 Ton Rail Crane is lying in LWRS for repair, expenditure incurred for Rail Crane repair, employees engaged and man power engaged for the repair, type of accident occurred with the Rail Crane, type of repair carried out and date of completion of repair and certification of the capacity, quality, and strength, the dates on which Road crane was brought from FMD during the period when Rail crane was not in Operation including its hours of utilisation, date of communication from Traffic to FMD regarding requirement of Road Crane along with copy of the same, the details of accidents taken place on Rail tracks in last 10 years, property lost due to accidents since last 20 years and the details of the employees who have expired and became physically handicapped. The CPIO replied vide letter No. VSP/RTI/2864 dated 09.05.2014, furnishing point wise information of available information. In respect of the information which was not available in compiled form, the Appellant was invited to inspect the relevant documents. However, not satisfied with the CPIO s reply, the appellant preferred first appeal but the same remained unheard. Feeling aggrieved the appellant approached the Commission. During the hearing, the Respondent has submitted a written submissions, which indicates that despite opportunity granted to the appellant to inspect the records, he did not respond nor did he turn up for inspection. The Respondent further submitted that no copy of First Appeal was provided by the appellant to the Respondents. CIC/CC/A/2014/000138-YA
Vide RTI application dated 19.02.2014, the appellant sought information under 6 points regarding procedure and guidelines to accumulate EL&HPL for any Employee of RINL as follows: Earlier procedure and guide lines to accumulate EL&HPL for Employees of RINL, copy of DPE guide lines and procedures, confirmation of collecting 4.50 paisa from executive, 0.50 paisa from non-executives and reason for the same, present procedure and guide lines to accumulate EL&HPL for any Employee of RINL, copy of DPE guide lines and procedures, system being followed in collecting Electrical Charges from Non-executives employees and Executives, the authority who decided to collect different electricity charges for executives and non-executives along with the copy of framed rule or Government Order, the time frame of wage revision of executives and copy of DPE guide lines. The CPIO replied vide letter No. VSP/RTI/2856 dated 09.07.2014 providing point wise information in respect of all queries raised by the Appellant. Not satisfied with the PIO s reply, the appellant preferred first appeal but the same remain unheard. Feeling aggrieved the appellant approached the Commission. During the hearing, the Respondent has submitted a written submissions, which indicates that despite opportunity granted to the appellant to inspect the records, he did not respond nor did he turn up for inspection. The Respondent further submitted that no copy of First Appeal was provided by the appellant to the Respondents. CIC/CC/A/2014/000139-YA Vide RTI application dated 19.02.2014, the appellant sought information under 5 points regarding an accident which took place at BF1 by loco motive no 8. The query was as follows: No. of Contract workers injured in the accident took place by locomotive no. 8 on 11 th February, 2014 along with their names, whether anybody has died, the name of the Contractor who has paid 6.5 lakhs to the deceased employee and the details of Safety Committee Report along with a copy.
The CPIO replied vide letter No. VSP/RTI/2857 dated 27.03.2014, furnishing point wise information in respect of all queries raised by the Appellant. The appellant preferred first appeal but the same remain During the hearing, the Respondent has submitted a written submissions, which indicates that despite opportunity granted to the appellant to inspect the records, he did not respond nor did he turn up for inspection. The Respondent further submitted that no copy of First Appeal was provided by the appellant to the Respondents. CIC/CC/A/2014/000280-YA The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 24.03.2014 seeking information under 6 points as follows: No. of Police cases filed against RINL Union Leaders from Jan 1995 to Dec 2013 along with case numbers, no. of employees and Union Leaders involved in the each case, no. of times cases were posted along with date and case no., case wise attendance list with date, who represented Management at the Court, expenditure incurred on cases filed on Union Leaders by the Management. The CPIO vide letter No. VSP/RTI/2914 dated 14.05.2014 furnished the available information in respect of all queries raised by the Appellant. However, dissatisfied with the CPIO s reply, the appellant preferred first appeal which was not disposed of. Feeling aggrieved the appellant approached the Commission. During the hearing, the Respondent has submitted a written submissions, which indicates that despite opportunity granted to the appellant to inspect the records, he did not respond nor did he turn up for inspection. The Respondent further submitted that no copy of First Appeal was provided by the appellant to the Respondents. CIC/CC/A/2014/000281-YA
The appellant sought information under 6 points vide RTI application dated 24.03.2014. The queries included: The report given by IR Section on a day of obstruction i.e. on 01.02.2012 by displaced persons in front of Main Building, no. of Union leaders participated as per IR Section report along with copies, No. of Union leaders delivered speech as per IR Section Staff Report dt. 01.02.2012 along with copies, period of time the entry was obstructed, details of the report given by displaced contract labour and displaced persons to CMD along with copies, copy of DARS sheet dt. 01-02-2012 of ARP No. 2 of Traffic Department. The appellant preferred a First Appeal upon non receipt of any response from the CPIO. However, as per Appellant s submissions, the First Appeal was not disposed of. Feeling aggrieved the appellant approached the Commission. During the hearing, the Respondents have submitted that vide letter No. VSP/RTI/2915 dated 12.09.2014 the CPIO had furnished point wise information in respect of all queries raised by the Appellant, copy whereof has also been placed on record. It has further been pointed out by the Respondent that an appeal dated 21.09.2014 was filed by the Appellant on being dissatisfied with the CPIO S reply dated 12.09.2014. The First Appeal was decided by the FAA s Order dated 09.10.2014, whereby the CPIO s reply was upheld. Copy of the FAA s order has been placed on record by the Respondent. CIC/CC/A/2014/000306-YA The Appellant has filed an RTI application dated 02.04.2014 the information wherein is bilingual. It has been submitted by the Appellant that upon non receipt of any response from the CPIO, he filed a First appeal which was also not disposed of. Thus the aggrieved appellant approached the Commission. During the hearing, the CPIO has submitted that vide letter No. VSP/RTI/2915 dated 12.09.2014 the CPIO had furnished point wise information in respect of all queries raised by the Appellant. Copy of the reply furnished by CPIO has been filed alongwith the submission by the Respondent. The Respondent has further submitted that two appeals dated 21.09.2014 were received from the appellant who was not satisfied with the information furnished by CPIO vide letter dated 12.09.2014. The FAA
disposed of the First Appeals vide Orders dated 04.10.2014& 07.10.2014 wherein the Appellate Authorities had agreed with the decision of CPIO. Copies of the FAAs orders have been placed on record by the Respondent. CIC/CC/A/2014/000500-YA The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 11.03.2014 seeking information under 5 points as follows: The list of all the Shift Incharges of all brigades and yardsof the Traffic department of VSP as per seniorityalong with their designations, clarification regarding usage of flags while moving the loco motives of the Operation section of the Traffic department in day time, clarification regarding usage of safety helmet and shoe while using locomotive by the staff of Operation section of the Traffic department, year wise no. of flags purchased since last 10 years, details of yards to which these flags were supplied, no. of helmets brought from Central Stores to Traffic department from January, 2000 to February, 2014, no. of helmets issued and employees issued with the helmet. CPIO vide letter dated 08.04.2014 furnished point wise information as available on record. In respect of the information which is not available in compiled form, the Appellant was invited to inspect the relevant documents. Not satisfied with the reply, the appellant preferred first appeal which was not disposed of. Feeling aggrieved the appellant approached the Commission. During the hearing, the Respondent has submitted a written submissions, which indicates that despite opportunity granted to the appellant to inspect the records, he did not respond nor did he turn up for inspection. The Respondent further submitted that no copy of First Appeal was provided by the appellant to the Respondents. CIC/CC/A/2014/000669-YA (Same as the case number CIC/CC/A/2014/000137-YA) Vide RTI application dated 21.02.2014, the appellant sought information under 9 points dealing with the following:
The period since which 50 Ton Rail Crane is lying in LWRS for repair, expenditure incurred for Rail Crane repair, employees engaged and man power engaged for the repair, type of accident occurred with the Rail Crane, type of repair carried out and date of completion of repair and certification of the capacity, quality, and strength, the dates on which Road crane was brought from FMD during the period when Rail crane was not in Operation including its hours of utilisation, date of communication from Traffic to FMD regarding requirement of Road Crane along with copy of the same, the details of accidents taken place on Rail tracks in last 10 years, property lost due to accidents since last 20 years and the details of the employees who have expired and became physically handicapped. The CPIO replied vide letter No. VSP/RTI/2864 dated 09.05.2014, furnishing point wise information of available information. In respect of the information which was not available in compiled form, the Appellant was invited to inspect the relevant documents. However, not satisfied with the CPIO s reply, the appellant preferred first appeal but the same remained unheard. Feeling aggrieved the appellant approached the Commission. During the hearing, the Respondent has submitted a written submissions, which indicates that despite opportunity granted to the appellant to inspect the records, he did not respond nor did he turn up for inspection. The Respondent further submitted that no copy of First Appeal was provided by the appellant to the Respondents. CIC/CC/A/2014/000694-YA (Same as file number CIC/CC/A/2014/000139-YA) Vide RTI application dated 19.02.2014, the appellant sought information under 5 points regarding an accident which took place at BF1 by loco motive no 8. The query was as follows: No. of Contract workers injured in the accident took place by locomotive no. 8 on 11 th February, 2014 along with their names, whether anybody has died, the name of the Contractor who has paid 6.5 lakhs to the deceased employee and the details of Safety Committee Report along with a copy. The CPIO replied vide letter No. VSP/RTI/2857 dated 27.03.2014, furnishing point wise information in respect of all queries raised by the Appellant. The appellant preferred first appeal but the same remain
During the hearing, the Respondent has submitted a written submissions, which indicates that despite opportunity granted to the appellant to inspect the records, he did not respond nor did he turn up for inspection. The Respondent further submitted that no copy of First Appeal was provided by the appellant to the Respondents. CIC/CC/A/2014/000796-YA The Appellant sought information vide RTI application dated 09.03.2014 under 8 points as follows: Length of railway line available in Traffic department before starting of expansion, length of railway line removed before starting of expansion, no. of rails, wooden sleepers, steel sleepers and fish plates removed before expansion and handed over to Traffic department by the persons who removed, no. of sleepers and fish plates used for laying each kilometre of railway track. The CPIO responded vide letter dated 23.06.2014 but did not furnish information on point nos. 2,4,5 & 6. The aggrieved appellant preferred first appeal but the same was not disposed of. Feeling aggrieved the appellant approached the Commission. During the hearing the CPIO submitted that vide letter No. VSP/RTI/2886 dated 23.06.2014 point wise information has been furnished in respect of all queries raised by the Appellant. Copy of the reply furnished by CPIO has been submitted before the Commission. It has further been submitted by the CPIO that an appeal dated 13.05.2014 has been received on non-receipt of information. CIC/CC/A/2014/002564-YA The appellant filed an RTI application dated 31.07.2014 seeking information under 6 points, as follows: Whether RINL, VSP is considering the disability percentage given by Government King George Hospital or the disability percentage given by VSGH, copy of Official Orders or rules which shows the disability certificate produced by the Government Hospital i.e. King George Hospital is not valid and the disability certificate produced by VSGH only is valid, if exists, the rule through which the percentage of disability is decided, If the leg of any worker is removed up to the knee in Visakhapatnam Steel Plant along with the copy,
percentage of disability as decided by VSGH if the hand of any worker is removed up to the shoulder in VSP, percentage of disability certified by VSGH, if a worker loses half of his one leg and half of his one hand, the rule through which percentage of disability is certified, possibility of providing employment to a person who is certified as 100% disable by the board of Government King George Hospital and there is no possibility of improvement in future and maximum percentage of disability accessible for anybody, to provide employment in VSP-RINL. CPIO vide letter dated 08.10.2014 furnished link for information sought. The appellant preferred first appeal but the same remained unheard. Feeling aggrieved the appellant approached the Commission. During the hearing, the Respondent submitted that vide letter No. VSP/RTI/3090 dated 08.10.2014 information available on the web had been furnished to the appellant and the link details were provided. Some of the information sought was hypothetical and not clear and hence could not be answered. Copy of the reply furnished by CPIO has been submitted before the Commission alongwith the submissions. The Respondent has further submitted that an appeal dated 06.09.2014 was received by them. CIC/CC/A/2014/002625-YA The appellant filed an RTI application dated 31.07.2014 seeking information under 5 points regarding various issues. Upon non receipt of any response from the CPIO, the appellant preferred a First Appeal which was also not disposed of. Feeling aggrieved the appellant approached the Commission. CIC/CC/A/2014/002635-YA The appellant filed an RTI application dated 31.07.2014 seeking information regarding list of tours of directors of VSO from 2008 to 2014. Upon non receipt of response from the CPIO, the appellant preferred first appeal but the same remained unheard. Feeling aggrieved the appellant approached the Commission.
CIC/CC/A/2014/002638-YA Vide RTI application dated 31.07.2014, the appellant sought information under 8 points regarding official tours undertaken to Kolkata by the present General Manager (GM) from 2005 to 2014. CPIO did not respond to the RTI application. The appellant preferred first appeal but the same remained unheard. Feeling aggrieved the appellant approached the Commission. CIC/CC/A/2014/002659-YA Vide RTI application dated 31.07.2014 the appellant sought information under 6 points regarding DARS Sheet ARP No. 2, dated 25.01.2014 pertaining to in-sheet & out-sheet. CPIO did not respond to the RTI application. The appellant preferred first appeal but the same remained unheard. Feeling aggrieved the appellant approached the Commission. During the hearing the Respondent has submitted that they had received 07 RTI applications on 31.07.2014 and 06 CIC appeals were filed in respect of the same. It has been submitted by the Respondents that since they could not link 05 applications with 04 appeals, a comprehensive reply addressing all five 05 applications has been provided by them. According to the Respondents, the following were enquired by the Appellant in the first application: soft copies of the replies of the below numbered RTI applications in a CD form along with the annexure if exists and hard copies if not possible to provide soft copy 574, 596, 607, 608, 615, 621, 622, 637, 641, 647, 648, 649, 650, 654, 655, 659, 660, 688, 719, 720, 724, 743, 744, 745, 746, 747, 748, 749, 750, 751, 754, 825, 826, 850, 851, 852, 863, 864, 880, 898, 916, 917, 918, 936, 937, 942, 947, 948, 956, 978, 1012, 1069, 1070, 1072, 1180, 1251, 1252, 1253, 1693, 1743, 1744, 1973, 1974, 2122, 2162, 2189, 2196, 2319, 2322, 2323, 2417, 2418, 2429, 2465, 2466, 2491, 2549, 2550, 2604, 2667, 2709, 2710, 2716, 2746, 2747, 2818, 2819, 2820, 2821, 2856, 2857, 2863, 2864, 2865, 2870, 2877, 2878, 2885, 2894, 2895, 2904, 2905, 2914, 2915, 2930, 2934, 2947, 2948, 2949, 2950, 2951, 2956, 2957, 2958, 3058, 3059.
The Respondent has stated that vide letter No. VSP/RTI/3089 dated 18.08.2014, CPIO had furnished the information in the form of CD, copy whereof has been submitted alongwith the submission before the Commission. The Respondent has denied receipt of any appeal against the information furnished by CPIO vide letter dt.18.08.2014. In the next RTI application of the same date wherein Information sought was as follows: year wise details of the official tours to Kolkata performed by the General Manager, Traffic department during the period from 2005 to 31 st July, 2014, details of the boarding facilities availed by the present GM, Traffic (Logistics) while on tour to Kolkata along with the copies, amount drawn, no. of days of tour, month wise demurrage paid to the Indian Railways since last 10 years by Traffic department, whether anybody other than Sri NageshGummalla, GM, has gone for such tours from Traffic department and if so the details of those who have gone on tour during the period from 2010 to 31 st July, 2014, no. of hand gloves released to Traffic department by Central Stores from 2010 to 31 st July, 2014, whether any material to various yards from Traffic department Stores will be issued by submitting the indent or by verbal communication, no. of private jeeps and cars allotted to Traffic department, these vehicles are allotted to whom and for what type of jobs,type of jobs for which those vehicles are being utilized, for drawing of which items from Traffic stores, indent is required to be produced and the item for which indenting is not needed. The Respondent has stated that the CPIO had replied vide letter No. VSP/RTI/3092 dated 15.11.2014 furnishing point wise available information sought by the Appellant. In respect of the information which is not available in compiled form, the Appellant was invited to inspect the relevant documents. However, the Appellant has not responded for the inspection as on date. Copy of the reply furnished by CPIO has been annexed with the submission by the Respondent. The Respondent have stated that they have received an appeal dated 06.09.2014 from the Appellant. The third RTI application filed by the Appellant of the same date 31.07.2014, dealt with the following queries: When was the JCM system implemented in Visakhapatnam Steel Plant by the Management and trade unions. Since when the concept of JCM requiring 15% of votes was withdrawn, when the JCM concept was implemented with the condition of getting 15% votes, buildings were constructed with Steel Plant funds to such unions who got 15% votes,copies of orders in which the area for the allotted building was mentioned and to which union, vide the above procedure,no. of buildings constructed with the Steel Plant funds were allotted to those Unions which have not got 15% of votes and to those which have not participated in the elections, whether any permission was given for the allotment of a
land and for the construction of a building to a union in Ukkunagaram by VSP, if not so, because of which executive s negligence, the progress of construction was not held up and the building was completed, the person responsible for the execution of rules framed by RINL/VSP, the person responsible for the execution of the laid terms and conditions while giving under lease or on illegal constructions, in VSP because of whose negligence, the lessee are violating the rules. The Respondent has submitted that the CPIO vide letter No. VSP/RTI/3094 dated 15.03.2016 had furnished point wise information sought by the Appellant, copy whereof has been placed on record. The Respondent has stated that an appeal dated 06.09.2014 has been received by them. The fourth RTI Application dated 31.07.2014 filed by the Appellant dealt with the following queries: Copies of in and out DARs sheet dt. 25.01.2014 of ARP No. 2, Traffic Department, copy of the permission letter dt. 25.01.2014 written by Emp. No. 105051 of Traffic Department, expenditure incurred for the construction of the Pylon which was shifted to Kurmannapalem, expenditure was incurred on shifting, no. of displaced persons lost their lands for Visakhapatnam Steel Plant are provided with permanent employment, copies of the reports submitted to the Indian Parliament, no. of displaced persons who are appointed as contract workers in VisakhaUkku, where it was declared that there are 16,500 contract workers present, no. of displaced persons appointed as contract workers, copies of the reports submitted to Indian Parliament or to the Ministry of Steel where it is mentioned that displaced persons are working under contractors, the criteria for the count and finalized that 16,500 contract workers are working in Visakhapatnam Steel Plant, no. of displaced persons among them and the list along with the R no. and their category (Skilled / un-skilled). The Respondent has stated in the submission that the CPIO replied vide letter No. VSP/RTI/3095 dated 22.03.2016 furnishing point wise information sought by the Appellant, copy whereof has been placed on record. An appeal dated 06.09.2014 was received by the Respondent subsequently. The fifth and last RTI application filed by the Appellant on the same date dealt with the following queries: No. of times each Director has visited to various branches of RINL / VSP during the period from January, 2008 to 31 st July, 2014 (Branches within our country), amount drawn by each of the Director towards travelling and accommodation during their visit to various branches during the period from January, 2008 to 31 st July, 2014, Director wise details who visited foreign countries during the period from 1 st April, 2010 to 31 st July, 2014, amount drawn towards travelling and accommodation during the visit, based on whose orders Directors are
visiting foreign countries, copies of the notesheets for the permission issued in respect of each Directors for their foreign trips, whether the air tickets are purchased from RINTRAS or through private agency, profits gained (either by selling or by purchase) by RINL on account of foreign trips of each Director to different places. The Respondent has submitted that in response to the above queries, the CPIO had provided the information vide letter No. VSP/RTI/3096 dated 05.04.2016, copy whereof has been placed on record by the Respondent. It has further been stated by the Respondent that an appeal dated 06.09.2014 has been received. CIC/CC/A/2014/002626-YA An RTI application dated 27.07.2014 has been filed by the appellant seeking the following information: No. of cases identified by the Vigilance department of VSP (RINL) as unjust, wrong way of spending Company s assets and the Public funds and earning of money in unfair way during the period from January, 2005 to July, 2014, no. of cases filed on workers, Executives and Contractors during the period from January, 2005 to July, 2014, details along with copies of notesheets, the name and designation of the executives working in Vigilance department of VSP (RINL), who are from Central Vigilance Commission and from RINL, along with the date from which they have been working in Vigilance department during the period from January, 2005 to July, 2014, whether Vigilance Department taken any action on the issue related to Ballast in the Permanent way section of Traffic Department and identified any violation of rules, if so, the copies of those notesheets, whether any attempt was made to concentrate on the issue of tours of VSP Officers and the Union leaders and the unjust bills produced by them after returning from tours during the period from 2005 to July, 2014. If so, whether any unjust bills produced by Executives, Non-Executives and Union leaders have been identified and reason for Vigilance Department in not responding on the unfair things happening on the tours. Not satisfied with the response of the CPIO dated 26.08.2014, the appellant preferred first appeal which was not disposed of. Feeling aggrieved the appellant approached the Commission. The Respondent appeared during the hearing and submitted that point wise information as available had already been furnished vide letter No.
VSP/RTI/3081 dated 26.08.2014, copy whereof has been placed on record by the Respondent. Despite providing call available information, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 06.09.2014 alleging non-receipt of information. CIC/CC/A/2014/002636-YA Vide RTI application dated 01.02.2014, the appellant sought information under 9 points regarding list of tours of Head of Department (HOD), Traffic Manager, VSP. CPIO vide letter dated 05.11.2014 furnished point wise information as available on record. The appellant preferred first appeal but the same remain CIC/CC/A/2014/002637-YA Vide RTI application dated 27.07.2014, the appellant sought information under 6 points regarding Hon ble Court Orders to remove 46 employees. CPIO did not respond to the RTI Application. The appellant preferred first appeal but the same remain unheard. Feeling aggrieved the appellant approached the Commission.
CIC/CC/A/2015/001951-YA Vide RTI application dated 12.04.2014, the appellant sought information under 2 points regarding Shri Nagesh Gummalla. CPIO did not respond to the RTI application. The appellant preferred first appeal but the same remain unheard. Feeling aggrieved the appellant approached the Commission. CIC/CC/A/2015/001953-YA Vide RTI application dated 06.11.2014, the appellant sought information under 9 points regarding report given by CER or IR department of RINL. CPIO did not respond to the RTI application. The appellant preferred first appeal but the same remain unheard. Feeling aggrieved the appellant approached the Commission.
CIC/YA/A/2014/002624-YA Vide RTI application dated 03.04.2014, the appellant sought information under 6 points regarding employees who are working G shift in PSY-SSY yard of Traffic Department. CPIO vide letter dated 23.06.2014, furnished point wise information as available on record. The appellant preferred first appeal but the same remain CIC/CC/A/2014/000853-YA Vide RTI application dated 04.03.2014, the appellant sought information under 2 points regarding supply of property returns of Traffic Department General Manager and all Dy. Gen Managers since 2000 to 2013. CPIO vide letter dated 14.05.2014 denied information under u/s 8(1)(e) & 8(1)(j). The appellant preferred first appeal but the same remained unheard. CIC/CC/A/2014/000854-YA Vide RTI application dated 21.04.2014, the appellant sought under 6 points in bilingual language. CPIO did not reply. The appellant preferred first appeal but the same remain
CIC/CC/A/2014/000855-YA Vide RTI application dated 05.04.2014, the appellant sought information under 8 points regarding VSP steel plant. CPIO did not reply. The appellant preferred first appeal but the same remain CIC/CC/A/2014/000856-YA Vide RTI application dated 04.04.2014, the appellant sought information under 9 points in bilingual. CPIO did not reply. The appellant preferred first appeal but the same remain CIC/CC/A/2014/000857-YA Vide RTI application dated 20.04.2014, the appellant sought information under 8 points regarding changing name of Training and Development Centre of Vishakhapatnam Steel plan. CPIO vide letter dated 22.05.2014 furnished point wise information as available on record. The appellant preferred first appeal but the same remain
CIC/CC/A/2014/001479-YA Vide RTI application dated 22.02.2014, the appellant sought information under 8 points regarding Loco Accidents list & Locos Collision list during the period from 2000 to 21 st February,2014. CPIO did not reply. The appellant preferred first appeal but the same remain CIC/CC/A/2014/001674-YA Vide RTI application dated 22.02.2014, the appellant sought multifaceted information under 15 points regarding names of employees list exist, while on duty from Traffic Department, VSP. CPIO did not reply. The appellant preferred first appeal but the same remain CIC/CC/A/2014/001687-YA
Vide RTI application dated 19.03.2014, the appellant sought information under 7 points regarding employees of Traffic Department. CPIO vide order dated 21.05.2014 furnished point wise information as available on record. The appellant preferred first appeal but the same remain CIC/CC/A/2014/002103-YA Vide RTI application dated 26.02.2014, the appellant sought information under 6 points regarding 500 residential contract labour of VSP. CPIO did not reply. The appellant preferred first appeal but the same remain CIC/CC/A/2014/002320-YA Vide RTI application dated 11.03.2014, the appellant sought 6 points information regarding dress given to the employees/officers. CPIO vide letter dated 07.08.2014 furnished point wise information as available on record. The appellant preferred first appeal but the same remain CIC/CC/A/2014/002321-YA
Vide RTI application dated 31.07.2014, the appellant sought information under 3 points regarding entrance test for employment in VSP cancelled by the Management of VSP. CPIO vide letter dated 28.10.2014 furnished point wise information as available on record. The appellant preferred first appeal but the same remain CIC/CC/A/2014/002531-YA Vide RTI application dated 20.03.2014. the appellant sought information under 8 points regarding accident/damage happened in Vishakhapatanam Steel Plant(VSP). CPIO vide letter 27.08.2014 furnished point wise information as available on record. The appellant preferred first appeal but the same remain unheard. Feeling aggrieved the appellant approached the Commission. CIC/CC/A/2014/002632-YA Vide RTI application dated 31.07.2014, the appellant sought information under 6 points regarding construction of Pylon II at Kurmanannapalem. CPIO vide letter dated 15.09.2014, furnished point wise information as available on record. The appellant preferred first appeal but the same remain
CIC/CC/A/2014/003038-YA Vide RTI application dated 28.10.2013, the appellant sought copies of DARs sheets of APR No. 0358, Administration Department, from 01.02.2013 till date. CPIO vide letter dated 27.11.2013 requested to send additional amount for sought information. The appellant preferred first appeal but the same remain CIC/CC/A/2014/003061-YA Vide RTI application dated 01.02.2014, the appellant sought 9 points information regarding list of official tours done by the Head of the Department, Traffic Manager, VSP. CPIO did not reply. The appellant preferred first appeal but the same remain CIC/SS/A/2014/000129-YA Vide RTI application dated 28.08.2013, the appellant sought information under 4 points regarding the pending/un-replied applications by Patta Appa Rao. CPIO did not reply. The appellant preferred first appeal but the same remain
CIC/CC/A/2015/001998-YA Vide RTI application dated 06.11.2014, the appellant sought 9 points information regarding the report which was given by CER or IR department of RINL. CPIO did not reply. The appellant preferred first appeal but the same remain CIC/YA/A/2015/002057 Vide RTI application dated 19.03.2015, the appellant sought information under 5 points regarding Monthly Attendance EDIT SHEET of Traffic Operation section. CPIO did not reply. The appellant preferred first appeal but the same remain CIC/YA/A/2015/002058 Vide RTI application dated 16.04.2015, the appellant sought information under 3 points regarding shift report book.
CPIO did not reply. The appellant preferred first appeal but the same remain CIC/YA/A/2016/000232 Vide RTI application dated 17.04.2015, the appellant sought information under 5 points regarding training in IIW, Vizag Chapter along with details of an executive from traffic department working as treasure for IIW. CPIO vide letter dated 25.05.2015 furnished no information is available in this regard. The appellant preferred first appeal. FAA vide order dated 11.08.2015 upheld the reply of CPIO. Feeling aggrieved the appellant approached the Commission. CIC/YA/A/2016/000233 Vide RTI application dated 19.04.2015, the appellant sought information under 3 points regarding issue of Permit slips. CPIO vide letter dated 25.05.2015, furnished point wise information as available on record. The appellant preferred first appeal. FAA vide order dated 11.08.2015 disposed of appeal by upholding the reply of CPIO. Feeling aggrieved the appellant approached the Commission. CIC/YA/A/2016/000234
Vide RTI application dated 04.04.2015, the appellant sought information under 3 points regarding action taken for low quality material in the Traffic Department (VSP). CPIO Vide letter dated 21.07.2015, furnished information on point nos. 2 & 3 voluminous and directed appellant to inspect the records in RINL/VSP. The appellant preferred first appeal. FAA vide letter dated 11.08.2015 disposed of appeal by upholding the reply of CPIO. Feeling aggrieved the appellant approached the Commission. CIC/YA/A/2016/000235 Vide RTI application dated 04.04.2015, the appellant sought information under 2 points regarding employees who did not attend shift wise duty of Central Traffic Control, Traffic department, VSP. CPIO vide letter 20.07.2015, furnished information sought is voluminous. The appellant preferred first appeal. FAA vide order dated 11.08.2015 disposed of appeal by upholding the reply of CPIO. Feeling aggrieved the appellant approached the Commission. CIC/YA/A/2016/000236 Vide RTI application dated 13.01.2015, the appellant sought information under 6 points regarding the Locomotive accidents have occurred between 1 st January, 2014 to Janaury, 2015 in Traffic Department of VSP. CPIO vide letter dated 30.07.2015 furnished information on point no. 4 denied the information u/s 8(1)j) and point no. 5 is voluminous. The appellant preferred first appeal. FAA vide order dated 11.08.2015 disposed of
appeal by upholding the reply of CPIO. Feeling aggrieved the appellant approached the Commission. (Yashovardhan Azad) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against application and payment of the charges prescribed under the Act to the CPIO of this Commission. (R.P.Grover) Designated Officer Copy to:-