Sunteți pe pagina 1din 3

Online Right to Information Application 28.5.


Ministry of Finance, Department of Financial Services

Parliament Street, New Delhi.

Re: Seeking information as per Right to Information Act,2005

Public Authority: New India Assurance Company Ltd, (NIACL)

The applicants faces un-ethical propaganda against him, since last

decade, he may kindly be informed of:-
(1). specific date the order of termination,if any, (a)is issued
(b)delivered including name, place and designation of officer.
Period of Information:- since 9/06/2011
The applicant requests that this RTI be communicated to highest decision makers of

Shrigopal Soni
C231,Panchsheel Nagar,Ajmer-305004 Cell No. 9414982395

6/01/2017 Central Information Commissioner hearing respondent is NIACL

Case No. Jaipur. Date of Decision 30 January 2017
CIC/MP/A/2016 RTI application of applicant 9/07/2015
/000371 Respondent:- Deputy Manager, NIACL, Jaipur RO

Relevant history to the present RTI applicantion

February Only grave act alleged in several pages of the
following is that of leaving headquarters

Well known bribe takers enjoy job security in the NIACL; not even placed to
April 2008 suspension. The applicant is isolated to suspension, the Rules quoted is
General Insurance(CDA)Rules 1975 amended upto
31/12/2007 source:-CPI Cell/2008/56 3.06.2008

12/06/ Even before the process of domestic enquiry the applicants misconduct is
2008 spread as propaganda in the Central Information Commission by NIACL

Ethics applicable to PSU decision makers stipulate the following:-
The Book of Dos and Donts List of Donts:-DO NOT:-Be arbitrary or
capricious in your decisions, your decisions should be justifiable and
based on sound reasons.

27/06/ A. R. Sekar NIACLs senior most General Managers order

2009 to applicant: RTI forwarded by National Human Rights
It (seeking access to information under RTI) is a crude
attempt to confuse the different authorities and an
attempt to escape from the due process of law

Novemb The Punitive (CDA) Rules are altered and/or replaced,

er 2009 NIAC(CDA)Rules 2003 Jaipur NIACL inflicts penalties
including dismissal as provided under Rule 23 of the CDA
The so called Rule 23 is not mentioned
anywhere in the aforesaid gyapan of February 1988

May 2010 NIACL Jaipur ratifies dismissal etc. penalties against

applicant, the Rules ,altered as NIACL(CDA)Rules 2003

June During proceedings of Industrial dispute , an order

2011 dated 9/06/2011 is communicated , chairman NIACL
set aside the penalties of November 2009
22/03/ Writ Petition No. 4007/2012 on behalf of chairman NIACL is
2012 registered in Jaipur bench, Rajasthan High Court.
The respondent is Union of India as well as the applicant.
9/4/ It is argued on behalf of NIACL that applicant has been re-
2012 instated.
30/7/ High court order:-order of dismissal has
already been substituted with lesser