The Right to Information Act mandates timely responses to requests, with non-compliance potentially leading to appeals, but ultimately compliance can negate further intervention.

Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka नई िद(cid:24)ी, New Delhi – 110067 File No: CIC/NPRCL/A/2024/605824 NITIN AGGRAWAL .….अपीलकता(cid:18)/Appellant VERSUS बनाम PIO, National Productivity Council, Utpadakta Bhawan, 5-6, Institutional Area, Lodhi Road, New Delhi – 110003 ….(cid:29)ितवादीगण /Respondent Date of Hearing : 10.07.2025 Date of Decision : 17.07.2025 INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari Relevant facts emerging from appeal:

RTI application filed on : 01.12.2023 CPIO replied on : 27.12.2023 First appeal filed on : 11.01.2024 First Appellate Authority’s order : 07.02.2024 2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 11.02.2024 Information sought:

1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 01.12.2023 (online) seeking the following information:

“I am writing to seek information under the provisions of the Right to Information Act, 2005 , regarding the status and actions taken in response to my communication addressed to the Secretary, DPIIT &

Chairman, NPC, and the Honorable Commerce and Industry Minister. &

President of NPC.

In my initial letter/email dated 04th June 2023, I brought to the attention of the Chairman and President on the matter concerning an appeal against discrimination in promotion and the alleged wrongful disposal of my representation by the National Productivity Council. After that, I sent follow-up letters/emails on the following dates: 24th July 2023, 11th September 2023, 04th October 2023, and 02nd November 2023 (copy enclosed).

I would appreciate it if you could provide me with detailed information on the actions taken, progress made, or any decisions reached in response to my aforementioned communications. Additionally, if there are any documents, records, or correspondences related to this matter, I kindly request copies of the same.

I believe that transparency and accountability are essential in ensuring the effective functioning of government bodies, and as a concerned citizen, I am exercising my right to seek information on this matter.

Please treat this request with urgency, and your prompt response will be highly appreciated. If any fees are applicable for providing the requested information, kindly inform me of the same.

Thank you for your attention to this matter, and I look forward to a timely and comprehensive response.”

2. The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 27.12.2023 stating as under:

“In this regard, it is informed that the information sought is not available with the undersigned.”

3. Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 11.01.2024.

The FAA vide its order dated 07.02.2024, upheld the reply of CPIO.

4. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.

Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:

The following were present:-

Appellant: Not Present.

Respondent: Shri Amitava Ray, GH (Admin) & CPIO and Shri Jaikaran, Legal Executive present in person.

5. Latest reply dated 18.06.2024 of the Respondent are taken on record and the same is reproduced hereinbelow:

“1. On 28th March 2023, DPC was conducted in NPC for Promotions to the posts of Deputy Director General, Director Grade-I, Director-Il & Deputy Director. In this context, representations have been filed by you, to DPIIT., alleging discrimination in promotion in the above mentioned DPC.

2. In this context, a committee chaired by Joint Secretary. DPIIT examined papers relating to the promotions made and came out with certain recommendations.

3. Further, during the 114th GB meeting of NPC held on 26th February 2024 at Vanijya Bhawan, New Delhi at 11.00 a.m, this DPC matter was placed.

4. The 114th GB directed that:-

i. Appropriate timelines shall be drawn up and adopted in regard to promotion interviews in future.

i