PRASHANSA SHARMA Vs. DELHI TRANSCO LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD on 23.12.14. Appellant not present. Respondent is represented by Shri .

(2.) THE appellant, Mrs. Prashasha Sarma, allegedly victimized by the cruelty, beating, desertion, dowry demand, MMS by her husband Sameer, a public servant and his family despite paying more than Rs. 50 lakh dowry to them. She wrote: "I got married to Sameer, my parents gave all luxury items i.e., i10 Car, AC, fridge, washing machine, all furniture (sofa, dining table with chairs, double bed) Gold worth Rs. 50 lakh and cloths and items of kitchen and electronic items i.e., TV camera, etc) in my marriage, arranged at star hotel on demand by mother -in -law Mrs. Sudha Rani. From day one mother in law, husband and my brother -in -law started torturing me and were saying 'you do good job. If you work and earn and give money to us then you will get food otherwise not. You bring money from your parents till you are not earning". I brought money twice from my parents and gave to them, but they were not satisfied, they wanted more and more. My mother in law told me that Sameer is paying mortgage of two houses and he is left with no money to feed you. I spent 15 days without food and lost 15 kg weight and went back to my parents house on asking of my mother in law and Sameer. My husband in fact deserted me and never came back to take me. I went along with Sameer on order of family court Dwarka. He beaten me on 8.5.13 and made my mms when I was changing my cloths. An FIR No. 142/13 is lodged at PS Dwarka on 9.5.2013 to this effect. I may please be furnished following information: 1) Is it not a duty of a government servant to maintain his family; 2) Is he allowed to beat his wife and make an MMS; 3) Is he permitted to give matrimonial advertisement when his first wife is alive and not divorced, 4) Is dual employment permitted in DTL, Since he is running a courier business also. She sought information about his moveable and immovable property details including bank details, income tax returns of last five years, annual property returns for the last five years, and information about the departmental proceedings if initiated against him on her written complaint submitted on 23.5.2013".

(3.) IN reply Mr. Vasudev, Manager HR PIO, dated 11.10.2013, (on point No. 2) the office referred to a letter dated 21.8.2013, three pages that can be obtained on payment of cost, (on point No. 3) she was asked to refer to conduct rules, (on point no 4) the CPIO claimed exemption of section 8(1)(h) saying disclosure of information impedes the process of investigation, (on point 5) she was advised to approach prosecution agency and (on point 6) information about car which he sold, and house in Noida. Unsatisfied with reply the appellant made First Appeal. FAA on 6.11.2013 upheld the order of the CPIO. The appellant made second appeal before the Commission.