Central Information Commission
Mr.M Rajendran vs Ministry Of Railways on 13 June, 2011
In the Central Information Commission
at
New Delhi
File No: CIC/AD/A/2011/000595
Date of Hearing : June 13, 2011
Date of Decision : June 13, 2011
Heard through Video Conferencing
Parties:
Applicant
Shri M Rajendran
No. 59/1, Subramania samy Koil Street
Saidapet
Chennai - 600 015.
Applicant was not present.
Respondent(s)
Southern Railway
Head quarter Office
Commercial Branch
Chennai - 600 003.
Represented by : Ms. Rathiraj, APIO
Shri Pradeep Mishra, Chief Engineer (Construction)
Information Commissioner : Mrs. Annapurna Dixit
___________________________________________________________________
In the Central Information Commission
at
New Delhi
File No: CIC/AD/A/2011/000595
ORDER
Background
1. The RTI Application dated 11.11.2010 was filed by the Applicant with the PIO, Southern Railway, HQ Office, Chennai giving list of number of stations in Tamil Nadu which are connected and interlinked with rail road lines in almost 99% circuitous route except from Tambaram to Chengalput station since here one has to come back about 400 metres on the same line, that is upto Chengalput Taluk office before proceeding to Kancheepuram, Arakonam. He wanted the PIO to clarify which of the two lines can be considered as circuitous. The existing line or the one without touching Chengalput station. The PIO, HQ Office, Commercial Branch replied on 18.11.2010 stating that information seeker is expected to ask for the information only as per section 2 (f) of the RTI Act and that his query is in the nature of seeking clarification. She therefore regretted her inability to provide the information. The Applicant filed his first appeal on 24.11.2010 seeking the same information. The Appellate Authority vide his order dated 24.12.2010 stated that the Railway Line between Chengleput and Kanchipuram was originally laid in Meter gauge and that the same line/route has been converted into Broad Gauge and that trains are operating on this route. He also stated that no further details regarding the alignment are available in his office. Still not satisfied the Applicant filed his second appeal before the Commission on 6.1.2011. Decision
2. The Commission after hearing the Respondents and on perusal of the submissions on record is of the opinion that the Appellant is not seeking any information as defined in Section 2(f) of the RTI Act. . Instead he is seeking the opinion of the PIO on which of the two lines is circuitous - the existing line or the line without touching Chengalpattu Station. After noting that the PIO has made an attempt to provide some information to the Appellant although the information sought falls outside the ambit of the RTI Act, the Commission reject the appeal and closes the case.
(Annapurna Dixit) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy (G.Subramanian) Deputy Registrar Cc
1. Shri M Rajendran No. 59/1, Subramania samy Koil Street Saidapet Chennai - 600 015.
2. The Public Information Officer Southern Railway Head quarter Office Commercial Branch Chennai - 600 003.
3. The Appellate Authority Southern Railway Head quarter Office Commercial s Branch Chennai - 600 003.
4. Officer Incharge, NIC.