Disposal of First Appeal dated February 09, 2009 filed by Transcript of FAA

Mr. Ketan Bhatt, Computer Professional working in the decision received

by email. Comments
Institute.
by applicant.

Mr. Ketan Bhatt, Computer Professional Working in the Institute DOES NOT keep its
employees informed about their
Institute for the last more than 20 years filed an appeal against performance. NOR does it
the response of the PIO, Mr. Kamalesh Joshi of this Institute. provide information even when
employee requests the same
Mr. Bhatt has been employed in the Institute in a fairly senior explicitly.

level for the last more than 20 years. Even after working Institute TRASHES employee
letters. And nobody even cares
with the Institute he refers the Institute as “your institute” to get back to the employee to
instead of “our Institute” or “the Institute”. This is crux tell that his letter is
trashed. Employee has to file
of his grievances. Had he considered the Institute as “our” an RTI even to know status of
his letter.
and contributed for its development, then there would not
Official records are destroyed
have been any problem.
on 'our' judgment!!

Select records go untraceable

I have gone through his appeal, the original application filed on resignation of its
custodian. BUT, no inquiry, no
with the PIO and his response as well as other documents. I police complain/FIR, nothing.
also had a detailed discussion with the PIO to know the facts.
If applicant calls it `OUR'
There was a request from the applicant as to allow him to institute, First Appellate
Authority (FAA) advises him
bring his own videographer as well as RTI expert which (in writing) **NOT** to use
RTI provisions to be informed
request has been turned down by me as there is no provision about his service related
in the Act as well as it will not serve any useful purpose. issues. Else, he passes such
unwarranted comments as FAA
under RTI Act.

Coming to the substantive issue of his letter to the Chairman. PIO has informed that there
does NOT exist any norms for
To the best of my knowledge, he has not specifically written
recruitment to the post that
any letter to the Chairman. On July 2, 2008 he put up an open this FAA is holding.

letter addressed to the Chairman of Board of Governors of the WHOSE institute is it ???
How much of it is public ?
Institute in all electronic notice boards of the Institute for the
How much private ?
entire Institute to read a document couched in satire. A hard
copy of this has been marked to the Director for sending it to
the Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Institute.

The PIO confessed that he was not aware of any letter written
by the applicant to the Chairman of the Institute as the
NOT true. A softcopy of
applicant has not marked a copy to him. Secondly, the PIO is
letter was delivered to PIO's
mailbox on 01-Jul-2008.
 In PIO's language, “Genuine
not obliged to scan through all the irrelevant mails appearing grievances are amicably
resolved”, rest are trashed, not
in the electronic notice board of the Institute which has been even acknowledged!!!
thoroughly misused by several people including the applicant. This `trashing' business is
fundamental violation of
citizen's right to be informed.
Director of the Institute was not obliged to send to the
If authority does not care to
Chairman whatever trash he received in his office. The even forward employee letter to
higher authority, it violates
applicant’s idea was not to redress any grievances but to
citizen's right to be informed
malign the Institute and its reputation. Otherwise there was about views, if any, of higher
authority.
no need for him to put his communication to the Chairman in
all notice boards of the Institute which would be read by all
who are accessible to the electronic notice board of the IIMA.
Generally matters of serious nature which require policy
level solutions are referred to the Chairman of the
As if “perverted grievance
Institute.
redressal mechanism” is NOT
serious enough to warrant
Chairman's attention!!
Officers of the Institute with the help of the Activity Heads
take care of any genuine grievances. There is a grievance
How does one qualify genuine
redressal mechanism in the Institute which has been re- grievance?

constituted recently. The Redressal Committee has

formulated certain processes to deal with all “genuine
grievances”. This policy is being announced to the Institute
Staff and Officers. The applicant need not worry about the
faculty grievances published in the draft hand book of the
WHY??? Applicant has every
Institute. The PIO has given full information about the right to be informed about who
all are having grievances. And
existence of grievance redressal mechanism in the Institute what are the grievances.
since long. I do not find anything wrong in the action of the
PIO.

I fully agree with the terms used by the PIO about the genuine
grievances. People who work for the Institute may have
These are the words of
some grievances and they are genuine which need to be Appellate Authority (under RTI
Act) of an institute that
resolved as early as possible. There are staff members who professes management!!!
remain in the Institute to generate grievances. Such staff
members do not contribute anything to the Institute but
grievances.
I do not agree with the applicant that there are several people
with grievances. Other than the applicant himself or couple
of staff members placed similar to the applicant, there are no
!!! `Genuine' grievances
large scale grievances among the employees in the Institute. amicably resolved. Others
trashed. NOT EVEN REGISTERED.
Since the grievances are limited and by and large all
grievances are resolved the Institute does not keep any
register.

I further suggest to the applicant that rather than wasting !!!! MUST READ PARA!!!!

his time in filing RTI applications one after the other and
filing appeals one after the other, he should start doing
some meaningful work in the Institute. If he does not
possess the skills to do the work he should acquire the
competency. Institute would be more than willing to help
him to acquire the desired skills so that he can contribute
positively to the Institute. Time and again, the applicant But the applicant has
NOT asked for ANY sort
has been assured that as soon as he shows results of his of grievance redressal.
work, his grievances will be taken care of. The applicant
He has only asked for
prefers to find short-cuts like misuse of RTI Act etc. which certain information
under RTI Act.
has been enacted for the common benefit of the citizen of
Unwarranted comments.
this country.

The appeal is disposed off accordingly.

Along with truth, justice

Name and address of the Second Appellate Authority: and spirit of RTI Act.
Central Information Commission
Club Building, Near Post Office
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi 110067
Secretary to IIMA
Board of Governors
NV Pillai
First Appellate Authority

Employee communication to top management are vital records for

any public authority and as such ought to be handled with due
diligence. Request directions u/s 19(8)(a)(iv).