The Chief Commissioner
CIC,August Kranti Bhavan,
New Delhi
Dear Sir
The applicant had appeared befoe CIC,JNU,New Delhi in the month of Dec,2009 in connection with the re-addressal of the following complaint wherein the Order of Addl Commissioner,Education Officer & Dy Chief Accountant ,MCD,has been reveresed without any rhyme and reason.It has been elaborated at length in the body of the following letter dt March 23,2010.I do not repeat the facts for the sake of brevity.
However, the Second Appellate Authority,namelySh Shailesh Gandhi,Commissioner,refused to attend to the Complaint for which we had been directed to appear as per CIC Rules stating the reason that he can not exercise his powers in the capacity of Second Appellate Authority as he can not use the same and he is only here to see that the photocopies of the rules and information needed has been furnished to the Applicant.
.Further,he stated that Ist Appellate Authority at MCD,Green Park,New Delhi can exercise his authority but he can not exercise his Second Appellate Authority.Therefore, he can not take any decision in this behalf.In otherwords, he categorically stated that he being the Commissioner & Second Appellate Authority is only just a mere Photostate Vendor and, therefore, he can only furnish us the photocopies of the relevant rules & nothing else and no decision can be taken by him.
I was taken aback by his this puerile stand in that he is here only to give the services of Vendor and no decision can be taken by a person of his stature who is here in this august Institute of CIC along with his Staff comprising of 15 Officers and Staff memebrs.Obviously,this inmical stand is against the CIC set rules.This is a dereliction of duty and no service has been given to us for which we were directed to by Ist Appellate Authority in black and white vide MCD letter dt Nov 08,2008 & for which he has been appointed by Govt to attend to the Public greivances.
In view of this,you are requested to look into this matter and order for the fresh evualaion of the entire Case as per the CIC rules on its merits as also pl see that your Officer work under the rules and are capable of taking some decision on merits rather than ending up just like a mere Photostat Vendor which he did and rendered no service at all.
The copy of the enclosed letter has also been submitted to Ist Appellate Authority,mcd,green park along with the enclosures and proofs as per CIC ruels.The same is also avalable with Mr Shaeilsh Gandh who did nothing in the matter.The same may pl be secured from his large office of 15 staff members if need be.
Awaiting your reply,Myself or my representative can appear as and when you send for.
Thanks & regards
UMA K KAPIL( GPO)
same as under.
March 23,2009
Second Appellate Authority,
Central Information Commission,Block No. IV,
5th Floor, Old JNU Campus,
New Delhi-110067
Re:Second Appeal being filed against the Order dt 24.09.2008 of First Authority,MCD,New Delhi
received by me on 7.01.2009.
In pursuance to the Order of First Appellate Authority,MCD,Green Park Ext,New Delhi,I wish to file the Second Appeal against this Order on the basis of the following cogent facts for your consideration, just and fair decision :-
1.The previous decision in respect of my Pension was taken by Addl Commissioner(Education) on 23.02.2001.The copy of this Order has already been submitted to First Appellate Authority,MCD,New Delhi. Apart from this,the Order of Addl Commissioner has been endorsed by Chief Accountant as well as Education Officer. Pl see.
2.This Order of Addl Commissioner has been reversed in toto on the recommendation of one mere Clerk and Admn Officer. This has been gathered by me from the written documents sent by MCD in response to my RTI Application to MCD Deptt,Green Park,South Zone,New Delhi. Indeed, this makes a complete departure of observance of Official rules and Protocol which is essentially a hallmark of running every administration anywhere;more so when this is a Govt Deptt and bodies.
3.This complete digression and flagrant violation in reversing the Order of Addl Commissioner,who is in all the ways, a Superior & Senior Officer to both Clerk & Admn Officer,namely Sh S.C.Gupta, was explained in depth to which,however, no heed has been paid and the First Authority has chosen to be completely evasive on this count. If at all,this Order of Addl Commissioner”s Order was required to be reversed in any eventuality,then this could only be done by Commissioner of MCD and not by the same rank and that too after getting recommendations from one Clerk and Admn Officer,who are much junior in their rank and file to the Competent Authority whose Order is being challenged in this puerile manner.
The Order of Addl Commissioner was challenged in a cavalier fashion by pointing out the alleged snags/shortcomings by both one Clerk and Admn Officer as stated by me in the body of letter dt May 26,2008.(The nothings of Clerk and A.O's are(Quote) “'Pension Orders are not in order and therefore he has recommended Vigilance Investigation in the matter.”
Contd...2
-2-
Further,again in 2005 the same AO(Pension) has stated that “Case being not covered under the Pension Rules” and reiterated “this is a mistake” which has crept in which the “Branch is trying to patch up”(Photocopies of these internal nothings submitted as a proof)These glaring insubordination appears to have escaped the attention of First Authority rather total evasiveness has been shown to while attending to my Appeal to First Authority.
Rather,it appears that both Clerk as well as A.O are trying to teach & admonish to Addl Commissioner,Chief Accountant Officer & Education Officer whose Order this was and are appear to be taking the Class of their Superior & Senior Officers in the matter of Administration. Indeed,this is a playful & obnoxious attitude. Therefore, pl see this aspect & affront which has prompted this injustice to me. For the sake of brevity, the office copy of my letter dt May 26,2008 is once again enclosed for your kind attention.
4.This Order of Addl Commissioner dt 23.2.2001 was issued in conformity with the concerned Rule 4(a),1957( a copy of this printed rule was submitted to First Authority) which categorically states that the “Retirement will be effective after the expiry of the leaves of an employee, if already he or she is on leave.” In the instant case,the concerned employee,namely,Mrs Veena Kapil,was already on long leave on medical grounds and accordingly ,the Competent Authority viz,Addl Commissioner, gave her retirement as per this Rule4(a),1957,effective after the expiry of her due leaves in credit e.g 22.11.1995.
In other words, she had her leave in credit upto 21.11.1995 and,therefore,in compliance with this relevant Rule 4(a)1957,Competent Authority,then Addl Commissioner allowed her retirement effective from 22.11.1995 which is perfectly O.K. Therefore, I fail to understand as to where any non-observance and inadvertence has crept in as allegedly stated by First Authority in her Order dt 24.09.2009.On this premise,she has accepted the reversal of the authentic Order of Addl Commissioner dt 23.2.2001 which was found correct & legal from all the standpoints for over 8 years by all and sundry in all the depts,viz Education Deptt Officer,Chief Accountant Deptt.(The copy of their written Orders has already been submitted to MCD .
5.The plea taken by First Appellate Authority is that the Order of Addl Commissioner dt 10/08/2008 rectifying the previous Order of Addl Commissioner dt 23.2.2001 which emerged after the recommendations of one Clerk and Admn Officer,was necessitated owing to the previous Order of Addl Commissioner having been issued inadvertently is incorrect and ridiculous in that the rules cited by First Appellate Authority viz CCS rule V and 48-A (allowing weightage etc)are irrelevant , un- applicable & nothing to do anything in the instant case. Surprisingly enough,these irrelevant rules forms the ludicrous basis and has necessitated the current Competent Authority to unnecessarily meddle with the previous Order dt 23.2.2001 of Addl Commissioner and his team of Chief Accountant and Education Officer.
Contd....3.
-3-
As per written rules applicable and as sent by MCD Authorities under RTI Act,2005 to me vide their letter dt 5th May,2008,these rules as quoted( V & 48-A) are relevant if and where the employee is already not on leave. In the present case,the employee is already on leave and, therefore the rule no:4 (a),1957 is applicable which endows upon the Competent Authority viz Addl Commissioner,to allow the “retirement to be effective after the expiry of leave of the employee if he or she is already on leave” without any weight age whatsoever.
If,we accept the applicability of these irrelevant rule such as Rule V & 48-A for the sake of an argument,even then these rules have not been properly applied nor any weightage given as per rules as explained in the body of my Appeal dt 26.5.2008..Pl see. This erroneous calculations were accepted by Accountant,Green Park,South Zone to Sh Ashish Jhinghan,who,therefore,wanted to rectify this and raise the Pension but he declined this owing to the non-applicability of these rules. Further,these are not my personal claims as wrongly alleged by First Appellate Authority but bonafide official claims as
per rule 4(a),1957 of MCD rules.
Her leave was up to 21.11.1995 and, therefore, as per this relevant rule 4 (a),1957 ( Office copy of this Rule 4(a),1957 furnished by MCD already stands submitted vide my Appeal dt 26 May,2009), Addl Commissioner authorized her retirement w e f 22/.11.1995 which is wholly correct. Hence,Pension should be effective w e f 22.11.1995.As regards,the extraordinary leave for which she was on leave up to 12.9.1998 on medical grounds,no remuneration such as no Salary inclusive of PF,Basic,DA,HRA or any annual increment whatsoever was ever paid to her during the period from 22.11.1995 to 12.9.1998(EOL) because in her Case, Rule no 4(a),1957 was applied by previous Additional Commissioner vide his Order dt 23.2.2001 and no weight -age was also allowed as per this rule.
Hence,this only confirms that the correct Order dt 23.2.2001 were issued by previous Addl Commissioner because this rule 4(a) is relevant and applicable here in her case. Therefore, retirement date as per this rule in her case should be w e f 22.11.95 & not 12.9.1998 as wrongly assumed by one Clerk, & Admn Officer who have challenged the Order in black and white.(Prof submitted).
6.As regards any admission allegedly given by Sh Ashish Jinghan,who appeared on the behalf his sister,namely,Mrs Veena Kapil,who is away to USA presently,it is emphatically denied that no such admission whatsoever has been given by him as being construed and all the necessary pleas and defenses taken under the Deptt's rules as enumerated in the body of letter May 26,2008,stand without any admission as erroneously stated/implied by First Authority.
Contd....4
-4-
In view of this, it is hoped that the above plea as outlined in the para 4 &5 vis-a-vis the applicability of the relevant rule 4(a) 1957,in the instant case,will be found acceptable on the basis of which my “retirement wil be effective after the expiry of my leave”(22.11.95) and your good-self will allow me this second Appeal;thereby sanctioning the illegal withholding of my Pension for which I had to forgo
Rs 1,19,000/.(Rs 1,09000 + Rs 18054 which I had to deposit from my own pocket. In other words,Pension should be sanctioned as per the previous Order dt 23.2.2001 w.e.f 22.11.95 & not 12.9.1998.
7.The Letter/Order dt 24.9.2008 from First Authority was never received by myself on the address given and, therefore,it was personally collected by Sh Ashish Jinghan, brother of Mrs Veena Kapil on 7th January,2009 from MCD Green Park,South Zone,Green Park Extn,New Delhi-16.Therefore, the stipulated time-limit of filing second appeal within 90 days of the date of the letter/Order of First Authority may please be waived and second appeal may pl be considered on its merits.
The outcome of second appeal may pl be communicated to me on the following address as myself has taken VRS from office;M/s National Insurance Co Ltd,Div No:18,R K Purum,New Delhi-66.
Thanks & regards,
Sincerely,
(U K KAPIL)GPO
Jinghan Enterprises,
Shop No: 7-A,(Mini Market),
Nanakpura(Near Gurudwara,)
Moti Bagh,
New Delhi-21
Encl:As Stated.
Aug 13, 2020
Complaint marked as Resolved 
MCD
West Delhi, Uttam Nagar
New Delhi
REG: Blockage of Sewer on School Road, UTTAM NAGAR, B-9 Near V.S.JEWELLERS
Sewers are totally blocked for the last two months and the manhole cover also broken and no body is concern. Due to this we face many problems in rainy season because they were overflow . kindly, help us and arrange to vacate the holes and cover them immediately or as soon as possible.
My contact no. is [protected]
Thank You
A.K.GARG