vkjVhvkbZ : 01.05.2018 izFke vihy: 07.06.2018 f}rh; vihy: 13.07.2018 ds-t-lw-vf/k-

vf/k-:dksbZ tokc ugha iz-v-vk-

vk- : 26.06.2018 lquokbZ dh frfFk: 21.10.2019 vkns"k 1- izkFkhZ us lwpuk dk vf/kdkj vf/kfu;e] 2005 ds varxZr nkf[ky vius mDr vkosnu] tks dsUnzh; tu lwpuk vf/kdkjh] fo"ks'k iqfyl bdkbZ] efgyk ,oa cPps] fnYyh iqfyl] ekyoh; uxj] ubZ fnYyh dks izsf'kr fd;k x;k Fkk] ds ek/;e ls izkFkhZ dh iq= o/kw }kjk fnukad 13-10-2016 dks fo"ks'k iqfyl bdkbZ] efgyk ,oa cPps] ukudiqjk dks izsf'kr f"kdk;r dh lR;kfir izfrfyfi rFkk mDr f"kdk;r ds lanHkZ esa iqfyl }kjk ntZ dh xbZ izkFkfedh dh izekf.kr izfr dh ekax dh FkhA 1 2- lafpdk esa miyC/k rF;ksa ds vuqlkj fu/kkZfjr vof/k esa dksbZ tokc izkIr ugha gksus ij izkFkhZ us izFke vihy lafLFkr dhA izFke vihyh; vf/kdkjh us vius vkns"k esa mYys[k fd;k gS fd izkFkhZ ds mDr vkosnu ds lanHkZ esa dsUnzh; tu lwpuk vf/kdkjh] fnYyh iqfyl ukudiqjk us fnukad 18-05-2018 dks tokc izsf'kr dj fn;k FkkA gkykafd izkFkhZ us izkIr tokc dh izfr vius izi= ds lkFk layXu ugha dh gSA cgjgky] izFke vihyh; vf/kdkjh us vius vkns"k esa dsUnzh;

vkjVhvkbZ : 04.04.2018 izFke vihy: 03.05.2018 f}rh; vihy: 28.05.2018 ds-t-lw-vf/k-

vf/k-:26.04.2018 iz-v-vk- vk- : 16.05.2018 lquokbZ dh frfFk: 23.10.2019 vkns"k 1- izkFkhZ us lwpuk dk vf/kdkj vf/kfu;e] 2005 ds varxZr nkf[ky vius mDr vkosnu] tks

dsUnzh; tu lwpuk vf/kdkjh] mPpre U;k;ky;] ubZ fnYyh dks izsf'kr fd;k x;k Fkk] ds ek/;e ls fnukad 29-08-2017 dks eq[; U;k;k/kh"k dks izsf'kr vius izkFkZuk i= ds lHkh i`'Bksa dh lR;kfir izfr;ka] mDr izkFkZuk i= ij dh x;h dkjZokbZ] fdlh ekeys esa loksZPp U;k;ky; ds vf/koDrk }kjk vius eqofDdy dks xqejkg djus dh fLFkfr esa mlds fo:) loksZPp U;k;ky; }kjk dh tk ldus okyh dkjZokbZ ls lacaf/kr fooj.k] U;kf;d eftLVsªV] yksd lsodksa vkfn }kjk dh xbZ xyrh ds fo:) U;k;ky; }kjk dh x;h dkjZokbZ vkSj vU; lacaf/kr lwpuk dh ekax dqy 12 fcanqvksa ds varxZr dh FkhA 2- lafpdk esa miyC/k rF;ksa ds vuqlkj dsUnzh; tu lwpuk vf/kdkjh] mPpre U;k;ky; us izkFkhZ dks fcanqokj lwpuk izsf'kr dhA blds varxZr fcanq la[;k 1 rFkk 2 dh lwpuk ds lanHkZ esa izkFkhZ dks muds izi= dks tufgr ;kfpdk ds fn"kkfunsZ"kksa ds rgr ugha vkus ds rF; ls voxr djk fn;k x;k Fkk rFkk blls lacaf/kr uksfVax dh izfr iznku dj nh x;h Fkh] tcfd fcanq la[;k 1 3 ls 5 vkSj 7 ls 12 rd dh lwpuk dks lwpuk dk vf/kdkj vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 2¼,Q½ ds varxZr lwpuk ugha ekuk x;k FkkA fcanq la[;k 6 dh lwpuk dks fof/kd jk; dh ekax ekurs gq, bls ,d tu lwpuk vf/kdkjh ds nkf;Ro ls ijs crk;k x;k FkkA izkIr tokc ls vlarq'V gksdj izkFkhZ us izFke vihy lafLFkr dhA izFke vihyh; vf/kdkjh us vius vkns"k esa dsUnzh; tu lwpuk vf/kdkjh }kjk iznku dh x;h lwpuk dks lgh Bgjk;kA vk;ksx dks izsf'kr vius f}rh; vihy esa izkFkhZ us okafNr lwpuk iznku djok;s tkus rFkk lacaf/kr vf/kdkjh ds fo:) vFkZn.M vf/kjksfir djus dk vkxzg vk;ksx ls fd;k gSA lquokbZ :

vkjVhvkbZ : 23.01.2018 izFke vihy: 28.02.2018 f}rh; vihy: 02.05.2018 ds-t-lw-vf/k-

vf/k-:dksbZ tokc ugha iz-v-vk-

vk- : dksbZ vkns"k ugha lquokbZ dh frfFk: 23.10.2019 vkns"k 1- izkFkhZ us lwpuk dk vf/kdkj vf/kfu;e] 2005 ds varxZr nkf[ky vius mDr vkosnu] tks dsUnzh; tu lwpuk vf/kdkjh] HkwoSKkfud losZ{k.k] mRrjh {ks=] y[kuÅ dks izsf'kr fd;k x;k Fkk] ds ek/;e ls o'kZ 2008 ls 2013 esa inksUur gq, fofHkUu dSMj@in&tSls iz"kklfud ,oa rduhdh vjktif=r deZpkfj;ksa dh lwph] orZeku in ij inksUufr dh frfFk] inksUufr ls iwoZ ds in ds fooj.k] fu;qfDr fu;eksa dh izfr vkfn lwpuk@nLrkostksa dh ekax dh FkhA 2- lafpdk esa miyC/k rF;ksa ds vuqlkj fu/kkZfjr vof/k esa dksbZ lwpuk izkIr ugha gksus ij izkFkhZ us izFke vihy lafLFkr dhA ysfdu izFke vihyh; vf/kdkjh dh rjQ ls izkFkhZ dks dksbZ vkns"k izkIr ugha gqvkA vk;ksx dks izsf'kr vius f}rh; vihy esa izkFkhZ us okafNr lwpuk iznku djok;s tkus dk vkxzg vk;ksx ls fd;k gSA 1 lquokbZ :

vkjVhvkbZ : 02.01.2018 izFke vihy: 21.03.2018 f}rh; vihy: 02.05.2018 ds-t-lw-vf/k-

vf/k-:30.01.2018 iz-v-vk-

vk- : dksbZ vkns"k ugha lquokbZ dh frfFk: 23.10.2019 vkns"k 1- izkFkhZ us lwpuk dk vf/kdkj vf/kfu;e] 2005 ds varxZr nkf[ky vius mDr vkosnu] tks dsUnzh; tu lwpuk vf/kdkjh] HkwoSKkfud losZ{k.k] if"peh {ks=] t;iqj dks izsf'kr fd;k x;k Fkk] ds ek/;e ls o'kZ 2009 ls 2013 esa inksUur gq, fofHkUu dSMj@in&tSls iz"kklfud ,oa rduhdh vjktif=r deZpkfj;ksadh lwph] orZeku in ij inksUufr dh frfFk] inksUufr ls iwoZ ds in ds fooj.k] fu;qfDr fu;eksa dh izfr vkfn lwpuk@nLrkostksa dh ekax dh FkhA 2- lafpdk esa miyC/k rF;ksa ds vuqlkj fu/kkZfjr vof/k esa dksbZ lwpuk izkIr ugha gksus ij izkFkhZ us izFke vihy lafLFkr dhA ysfdu izFke vihyh; vf/kdkjh dh rjQ ls izkFkhZ dks dksbZ vkns"k izkIr ugha gqvkA vk;ksx dks izsf'kr vius f}rh; vihy esa izkFkhZ us okafNr lwpuk iznku djok;s tkus dk vkxzg vk;ksx ls fd;k gSA 1 lquokbZ :

vkjVhvkbZ : 03.01.2018 izFke vihy: 12.02.2018 f}rh; vihy: 04.05.2018 ds-t-lw-vf/k-

vf/k-:26.03.2018 iz-v-vk-

vk- : dksbZ vkns"k ugha lquokbZ dh frfFk: 23.10.2019 vkns"k 1- izkFkhZ us lwpuk dk vf/kdkj vf/kfu;e] 2005 ds varxZr nkf[ky vius mDr vkosnu] tks dsUnzh; tu lwpuk vf/kdkjh] lkmFk bZLVuZ dksyQhYM~l fyfeVsM ¼,lbZlh,y½] dksjck] NRrhlx<+ dks izsf'kr fd;k x;k Fkk] ds ek/;e ls i= Øekad 4825 fnukad 15-12-2017 ls lacaf/kr leLr nLrkostksa dh Nk;kizfr;ksa rFkk muds fujh{k.k dh ekax dh FkhA 2- lafpdk esa miyC/k rF;ksa ds vuqlkj dsUnzh; tu lwpuk vf/kdkjh] ,lbZlh,y] fcykliqj us fof/k foHkkx ls izkIr tokc dh 1 i`'B dh izfr izkFkhZ dks izsf'kr dj nhA gkykafd izkFkhZ us vius izi= ds lkFk fof/k foHkkx ds i= dh izfr dks layXu ugha fd;k gSA gkykafd izkFkhZ us fdlh Hkh izdkj dh lwpuk izkIr ugha gksus dh f"kdk;r djrs gq, izFke vihy lafLFkr dhA ysfdu izFke vihyh; vf/kdkjh dh rjQ ls izkFkhZ dks dksbZ vkns"k izkIr ugha gqvkA vk;ksx dks izsf'kr vius f}rh; vihy esa izkFkhZ us okafNr iw.kZ lwpuk iznku djok;s tkus dk vkxzg vk;ksx ls fd;k gSA 1 lquokbZ :

vkjVhvkbZ : 08.01.2018 izFke vihy: 27.03.2018 f}rh; vihy: 08.06.2018 ds-t-lw-vf/k-

vf/k-:dksbZ tokc ugha iz-v-vk-

vk- : 20.04.2018 lquokbZ dh frfFk: 24.10.2019 vkns"k 1- izkFkhZ us lwpuk dk vf/kdkj vf/kfu;e] 2005 ds varxZr nkf[ky vius mDr vkosnu] tks

dsUnzh; tu lwpuk vf/kdkjh] lkmFk bLVuZ dksyQhYM~l fyfeVsM ¼,lbZlh,y½] fcykliqj dks izsf'kr fd;k x;k Fkk] ds ek/;e ls i= Øekad ,ds,%tsih,y 2400 esa-ok-%,lbZlh,y%91@26 twu 2015 rFkk ftany ikoj fyfeVsM ds DO Øekad 052015@4909@01863@166270 fnukad 18- 05-2015 ds lanHkZ esa ,fj;k lsYl eSustj ,lbZlh,y jk;x<+ ,fj;k dks fn;s x, f"kdk;r i=] tks dksy ifjogu ds laca/k esa [knku dh vl{kerk ls lacaf/kr Fkh vkSj ftldh izfrfyfi v/;{k&lg&izca/kd funs"kd] fcykliqj dks i`'Bkafdr Fkh] ds lanHkZ esa v/;{k&lg&izca/kd funs"kd] fcykliqj dk;kZy; }kjk dh x;h dkjZokbZ dh lwpuk rFkkk leLr fjiksVksaZ dh Nk;kizfr;ksa dh ekax dh FkhA 2- lafpdk esa miyC/k rF;ksa ds vuqlkj dsUnzh; tu lwpuk vf/kdkjh] fcykliqj] NRrhlx<+ us izkFkhZ dk vkosnu lwpuk dk vf/kdkj vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 6¼3½ ds varxZr yksd lwpuk vf/kdkjh] jk;x<+ dks varfjr dj fn;kA izkFkhZ dh jk; esa dsUnzh; tu lwpuk vf/kdkjh] fcykliqj] 1 NRrhlx<+ }kjk izkFkhZ dk vkosnu dsUnzh; tu lwpuk vf/kdkjh] jk;x<+] ,lbZlh,y dks varfjr fd;k tkuk xyr Fkk] D;ksafd izkFkhZ dh jk; esa lwpuk ,lbZlh,y fcykliqj ls gh lacaf/kr FkhA blh vk/kkj ij izkFkhZ us izFke vihyh; vf/kdkjh] fcykliqj ds le{k izFke vihy lafLFkr dhA ysfdu izFke vihyh; vf/kdkjh] fcykliqj us izkFkhZ dks izFke vihyh; vf/kdkjh] jk;x<+ ls lh/ks laidZ djus dh lykg nhA vk;ksx dks izsf'kr vius f}rh; vihy esa dsUnzh; tu lwpuk vf/kdkjh] ,lbZlh,y] fcykliqj ls lwpuk iznku djok;s tkus] muij ij vFkZn.M vf/kjksfir djus vkSj izkFkhZ dks {kfriwfrZ iznku djok;s tkus dk vkxzg vk;ksx ls fd;k gSA lquokbZ :

The Appellant vide his RTI application sought information regarding the status of 02 cattle insurance claims of the policy numbers mentioned in the RTI application.

The CPIO and AO, Head Office, vide its letter dated 26.12.2017, transferred the RTI application to the CPIO, Kanpur Regional Office, for necessary action at their end. Dissatisfied by the response, the Appellant approached the FAA. The FAA, vide its order dated 20.02.2018, directed the CPIO, Kanpur Regional Office, to immediately provide the information to the Appellant after examining the application on merits.

HEARING:

Facts emerging during the hearing:

The following were present:

Appellant: Absent;

Respondent: Mr. Zia-Ullah Khan, Mgr. and Mr. Ashok Kr. Gupta, Mgr. through VC Page 1 of 4 The Appellant remained absent during the hearing. Mr. Ajit Kumar, Network Engineer, NIC studio at Allahabad confirmed the absence of the Appellant. The Respondent informed the Commission that the claim pertaining to Tag No. 91165 had been settled on 26.03.2018 and an amount of Rs. 58,400/- was credited to his account. In respect of the cattle insurance Tag No. 91117, the policy details were not available in their office and the branch office at Sultanpur had also been informed but the necessary details could not be ascertained. It would be appropriate, if the Appellant furnishes fresh details so as to enable them to process the claim as per extant guidelines.

The Appellant vide his RTI application sought information on 06 points regarding the issuance of policy number 295077056 dated 21.01.2009 in the name of his wife Mrs. Gunjana Pandey; whether the aforementioned policy had matured or the policyholder Mrs. Gunjana Pandey expired prior to its maturity and issues related thereto.

The CPIO, vide its letter dated 05.10.2017, denied disclosure of information u/s 8 (1) (j) of the RTI Act, 2005. Dissatisfied by the response, the Appellant approached the FAA. The FAA, vide its order dated 31.01.2018 while concurring with the response of the CPIO stated that the name of the husband was not indicated in the policy documents of Late Gunjana Pandey.

HEARING:

2. The appellant filed a second appeal before the Commission on the grounds that the respondent did not provide information on point nos. 1 to 7 and 13 of his RTI application on the plea that the matter is pending investigation and hence the information sought is exempted from disclosure under Section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act. He further contended that information/reply provided under points 8-10, and 12 of his RTI application was not satisfactory. The appellant requested the Commission to direct the respondent to provide the information sought by him.

Hearing:

3. The appellant Shri Priyash Bhargava and the respondents Shri Ajay, ACP, Shri Ajit Pal Tomar, Inspector, North West District, Ms. Meena, APIO, PHQ, Delhi Police, were present in person.

The Complainant vide her RTI application sought information in respect of salary details i.e. basic pay and gross salary of Mr. Partha Bhatta (Emp No. 9886) for the month of November & December, 2016.

The CPIO, vide its letter dated 13.01.2017, denied disclosure of information being related to a Third Party u/s 11 (1) of the RTI Act, 2005. Dissatisfied by the CPIO's response, the Complainant approached the FAA. The Order of the FAA, if any, is not on the record of the Commission.

HEARING:

Facts emerging during the hearing:

The following were present:

Complainant: Absent;

Respondent: Mr. Ram Kishore, Jt. Gen. Mgr. (HR);

Page 1 of 3

The Appellant vide his RTI application sought copy of the first 45 pages of the note sheet copies of the CBEC File Bearing File No. A-22015/22/2009-Ad.III-A.

Dissatisfied with the CPIO's response, the Appellant approached the FAA. The FAA, vide its order dated 29.01.2018 while stating that a reply containing 42 pages was provided by the CPIO upheld the same.

HEARING:

Facts emerging during the hearing:

The following were present:

Appellant: Absent;

Respondent: Mohd. Ashif, US, CBIC;

Page 1 of 3

The Appellant remained absent during the hearing. The Respondent informed the Commission that the CPIO vide its letter dated 11.12.2017 had furnished information sought by the Appellant. On a query from the Commission regarding the public interest or the nature of information contained in the note sheet etc., it was observed that the Respondent was unaware of the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 and that no due diligence was exercised in providing information sought by the Appellant. The Respondent present at the hearing feigned ignorance of the provisions of the Act. In its written submission dated 02.05.2018 (by Shri B. K. Manthan), it was reiterated that the Appellant was provided the information sought by him by the CPIO/FAA.

The Appellant vide his RTI application sought information on 02 points regarding his reply dated 22.11.2013 addressed to the Commissioner of Customs (Gen) i.e., Disciplinary Authority in response to the Charge Sheet Memorandum dated 11.11.2013, copy of file noting dealing with the aforementioned reply dated 22.11.2013, copy of file noting culminating into initiation of Inquiry proceedings/ issuance of Appointment Order of Inquiry Officer in the above matter.

The CPIO, vide its reply dated 01.02.2018 denied disclosure of information u/s 8 (1) (h) of the RTI Act, 2005. Dissatisfied by the response, the Appellant approached the FAA. The FAA, vide its order dated 01.03.2018 denied disclosure of information u/s 8 (1) (j) and (h) of the RTI Act, 2005.

The Appellant vide his RTI application sought information on 08 points regarding the details of the total number of court cases pending/dismissed/withdrawn/disposed of under the jurisdiction of North Central Zonal Office in different Labour Court/ High Court/Supreme Court between LIC of India versus DSE/CO/DSE's, Union/DSE's Association/CO's union/CO's Association and/or any other of/body representing workers; the case number and present status of the case as on date individually and other issues related thereto.

The CPIO, vide its letter dated 08.11.2017, provided a point wise response to the Appellant. Dissatisfied with CPIO's response, the Appellant approached the FAA. The FAA, vide its order dated 19.12.2017 while relying upon the decision of the Commission in Appeal No. CIC/VS/A/2012/001426/04589 dated 30.08.2013 in the matter of Shri Aseem Takyar v/s CPIO, DMRC, upheld the CPIO's response.

The Appellant vide his RTI application sought information on 10 points in respect of the details of total Number of Application forms received since 01.04.2015, till date, regarding joining as Chief Organiser (LIC Direct) under the LIC of India Chief Organiser (LIC Direct) Scheme, 2015 along with the name of the applicants; the date on which the applications were received by the Respondent Public Authority and other issues related thereto.

The CPIO, vide its letter dated 18.11.2017, provided a point wise response to the Appellant wherein for Points 01,02 and 09, the information sought was denied under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, 2005, and for other points, a suitable response was provided. Dissatisfied with CPIO's response, the Appellant approached the FAA. The FAA, vide its order dated 28.12.2017, upheld the CPIO's response.

The Appellant vide his RTI application sought information on 03 points regarding whether decision pertaining to the issue of higher education allowance/ qualification pay to Staff Nurses (Permanent employees of NIMHANS possessing M. Sc. Nursing at the time of appointment) was taken by the competent authority or not; if yes, whether higher education allowance/ qualification pay to permanent employees in NIMHANS was issued from the date of appointment or not and issues related thereto.

The CPIO, vide its letter dated 05.03.2018, provided a point wise response to the Appellant. Dissatisfied by the response, the Appellant approached the FAA. The FAA, vide its order dated 19.03.2018, provided additional clarifications to the Appellant.

The Appellant vide his RTI application sought information on 10 points in respect of the details of total Number of Application forms received since 01.04.2015, till date, regarding joining as Chief Organiser (LIC Direct) under the LIC of India Chief Organiser (LIC Direct) Scheme, 2015 along with the names of the Applicants; the date on which the applications were received by the Respondent Public Authority and other issues related thereto.

The CPIO, vide its letter dated 20.11.2017, provided a point wise response to the Appellant wherein for Point No. 01, the information sought was denied under Section 8(1) (d), (j) and (g) of the RTI Act, 2005 and for point no. 09, under Section 8(1)(d) of the RTI Act, 2005 and for other points a suitable response was provided. Dissatisfied with CPIO's response, the Appellant approached the FAA. The FAA, vide its order dated 15.01.2018 while referring to the decision of the Commission in Appeal No. CIC/DS/A/2013/002122/MP in the matter of Smt. Sajitha Page 1 of 5 Anilkumar, Kottayam Vs. LIC of India, stated that CPIO had already provided a suitable point wise response to the Appellant.

The Appellant vide his RTI application sought information on 05 points regarding the complaints filed by him against M/s Rhine and Raavi Credits and Holding Co. Ltd, regarding the debenture taken by him. He desired to know the date by which the amount invested by him would be reimbursed to him, reasons for which the SEBI was not complying with the instructions of the M/o Finance in the matter and issues related thereto.

The CPIO and Dy. Director, D/o Economic Affairs, Financial Markets Division, Primary Markets Branch, vide its letter dated 09.10.2017 transferred the RTI application to the CPIO, SEBI, Mumbai, u/s 6 (3) of the RTI Act, 2005. Dissatisfied by the response of the CPIO, the Appellant approached the FAA. The FAA and Jt. Director (Secondary Markets), D/o Economic Affairs, Financial Markets Division, Primary Markets Branch, vide its order dated 08.11.2017 advised the Appellant to take up the matter directly with SEBI either as an Appeal or a letter in continuation of the existing correspondences in this regard.

The Appellant vide his RTI application sought information on 10 points in respect of the details of total number of application forms received since 01.04.2015, till date, regarding joining as Chief Organiser (LIC Direct) under the LIC of India Chief Organiser (LIC Direct) Scheme, 2015 along with the names of the applicants; the date on which the applications were received by the Respondent Public Authority and other issues related thereto.

The CPIO, vide its letter dated 11.11.2017, provided a point-wise response to the Appellant wherein for Points 02, 04, 06, 09 and 10, the information sought was denied under Section 8(1)(d) and (j) of the RTI Act, 2005, and for other points, a suitable response was provided. Dissatisfied with CPIO's response, the Appellant approached the FAA. The FAA, vide its order dated 10.01.2018, reiterated the CPIO's response and disposed of the Appeal.

The Appellant vide his RTI application sought information on 10 points in respect of the details of total number of application forms received since 01.04.2015, till date, regarding joining as Chief Organiser (LIC Direct) under the LIC of India Chief Organiser (LIC Direct) Scheme, 2015 along with the names of the Applicants; the date on which the applications were received by the Respondent Public Authority and other issues related thereto.

The CPIO, vide its letter dated 20.11.2017, provided a point-wise response to the Appellant wherein for Point no 01, the information sought was denied under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, 2005 and for other points, a suitable response was provided. Dissatisfied with CPIO's response, the Appellant approached the FAA. The FAA, vide its order dated 04.01.2018, upheld the CPIO's response.

vkjVhvkbZ : 08.01.2018 izFke vihy: 24.01.2018 f}rh; vihy: 04.06.2018 ds-t-lw-vf/k-:13.01.2018 iz-v-vk- : 26.03.2018 lquokbZ dh frfFk: 25.10.2019 vkns"k 1- izkFkhZ us lwpuk dk vf/kdkj vf/kfu;e] 2005 ds varxZr nkf[ky vius mDr vkosnu] tks dsUnzh; tu lwpuk vf/kdkjh] lkmFk bLVuZ dksyQhYM~l fyfeVsM ¼,lbZlh,y½] fcykliqj dks izsf'kr fd;k x;k Fkk] ds ek/;e ls i= Øekad ,ds, % tsih,y 2400 esa-ok- % ,lbZlh,y% 92@08 tqykbZ] 2015 ds lanHkZ esa DO Øekad 052015@4909@01863@166270 fnukad 18-05-2015 ds ek/;e ls egkizca/kd] lsYl ,.M ekdsZfVax] fcykliqj dks fn;s x, f"kdk;r i=] tks dksy ifjogu ds laca/k esa [knku dh vl{kerk ls lacaf/kr Fkh ds lanHkZ esa dh x;h dkjZokbZ dh lwpuk rFkk leLr fjiksVksaZ dh Nk;kizfr;ksa dh ekax dh FkhA 2- lafpdk esa miyC/k rF;ksa ds vuqlkj dsUnzh; tu lwpuk vf/kdkjh] fcykliqj] NRrhlx<+ us izkFkhZ dks ;g lwfpr fd;k fd lwpuk dk vf/kdkj vf/kfu;e] 2005 ds rgr yksd lwpuk foHkkx }kjk fdlh rjg dh tkap ;k dkjZokbZ ugha dh tkrh gSA izkIr tokc ls vlarq'V gksdj izkFkhZ us izFke vihyh; vf/kdkjh] fcykliqj ds le{k izFke vihy lafLFkr dhA izFke vihyh;