news details |
|
|
| XEn PMGSY Mahore files written statement in SIC | | Alleged harassment by RTI applicant | | Early Times Report
Jammu, Nov 27: Executive Engineer (XEn) Pradhan Mantri Grameen Sadak Yojna (PMGSY) Mahore division has filed a written statement before State Information Commission (SIC) alleging harassment by a local RTI applicant who allegedly keeps harassing Govt officers in Mahore area.
Details available with Early Times reveal that on 04.12.2017 an RTI application was filed by one Mohammad Ayub Ayan R/O Mahore Reasi with the PIO/Executive Engineer, PMGSY, Division Mahore seeking information on 13 points with respect to roads constructed under PMGSY in Mahore Division including details of number of culverts constructed, number of bridges constructed, names of contractors etc.
On the failure of the PIO to furnish information within the specified period, the appellant filed First Appeal before First Appellate Authority (FAA) the Superintending Engineer, PMGSY Circle Reasi-Udhampur on 02.01.2018 praying for a direction to the PIO to provide the information to the appellant.
The appeal finally came up for hearing before SIC on 13.11.2018. The PIO / Xen PMGSY submitted that the appellant has sought huge and voluminous information and it was not possible for the PIO to prepare and collect such huge information in view of the shortage of manpower in his office. The PIO also submitted that the appellant is unnecessarily harassing the PIO and has filed many RTI applications seeking all and sundry information. The PIO also submitted that the appellant is habitual of harassing the public authorities and the PIOs in district Reasi by filing scores of RTI applications and seeking frivolous information with the sole aim of intimidating the public authorities/PIOs for securing undue benefits. The PIO further pointed out that even the State Information Commission (SIC) has previously observed that Ayoub Ayan was misusing the Right to Information Act by filing motivating and exploitative applications.
SIC in its order ruled that the PIO is directed to offer another opportunity of inspection of records to the appellant and facilitate inspection of records by the appellant on a date as may be fixed by the PIO for that purpose. The information sought by the appellant in the present case is undoubtedly huge and voluminous and copying of such huge information would definitely divert the resources of the office of PIO disproportionately, besides being almost impossible in view of shortage of manpower. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
