ORDER
FACTS:
1. The appellant sought the Cop.7 of notesheets connected to the transfer of Office Superintendent in March 20172. Does DGT feel that Shri S. Harinath Babu, JDT/HOD was empowered to impose minor penalty against me which was lifted by the DGT vide order No. DGET-C-31011/2016-VFTA dated 18.07.2017 (copy enclosed). lf not, please be informed the reason for keeping away this crucial point while issuing the penalty lifting order. 3. Copy of all warning letters to Shri S. Harinath Babu may also be provided. 4. Name of the Head of Department of RVTI Mumbai it present may be informed. Please provide copy of the order issued in this regard. Shri S. Harinath Babu is declared as HOD of ATI, Mumbai vide order dated 28.3.2018 which inter-alia also holds the charge of the HOD-RWI Mumbai where the post of Principal holds by his spouse which is contradict Govt. Rules & Regulations as it may attracts conflicts of interest. 5. the papers/documents/correspondences relevant to the Shri S. Harinath Babu, the then IDT which were produced before the DPC for his consideration to the post of
1
Director, copy of relevant Note-sheets & DPC minutes. The CPIO replied on 01.04.2018 and provided the copies of promotion orders but refused to answer all queries in form of questions.
Decision :
2. The officers representing the Public Authority submitted that the Commission has recorded admonition against the appellant and warned him not to file several RTI applications despite which the appellant continues to make repetitive and multiple RTI applications on identical subject-matter. The officer stated that the inquiry of Department against the appellant is under process and meanwhile the appellant attempts to seek vague information about inquiring authorities and threatens the officials to file petitions before grievance portal of Prime Minister's Office.
3. The appellant stated that he is participating in the hearing conducted in the departmental hearing but the Public Authority is not providing the correspondences. The officers explained that the appellant has been provided information required by him earlier and the final report shall be given to him upon completion of the inquiry proceedings.
4. The Commission has perused the records and submissions of both parties. The Commission warns the appellant and reiterates its admonition against the appellant for reckless wastage of public money and resources caused due to unreasonable RTI applications. The Public Authority is authorised to cite this order of the Commission and reject RTI applications of similar subject-matter in future. SD/-
(M. Sridhar Acharyulu)
Central Information Commissioner
2