Central Information Commission
Rajiv Kumar Khare vs Railway Board on 27 September, 2017
क य सूचना आयोग
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
लब बि डंग (पो ट ऑ फस केपास)
Club Building (Near Post Office)
ओ ड जेन यू कपस, नई !द ल -110067
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi-110067
Tel: +91-11-26182593/26182594
Email: [email protected]
File No.: CIC/RAILB/A/2016/300571-AB
In the matter of:
Rajiv Kumar Khare,
...Appellant
VS
DPG & CPIO,
RTI Cell Room No-507,
5th floor, Railway Board,
New Delhi-110001 ...Respondent
Dates
RTI application : 13.01.2016
CPIO reply : 11.03.2016
First Appeal : 06.04.2016
FAA Order : Not on record
Second Appeal : 21.07.2016
Date of hearing : 19.09.2017
Facts:
The appellant vide RTI application dated 13.01.2016 sought reason for stoppage of train no 11060 and 11056. The CPIO replied on 11.03.2016. The appellant filed first appeal on 06.04.2016. The First Appellate Authority(FAA's) order is not on record. The appellant filed second appeal before this Commission on 21.07.2016.
Grounds for Second Appeal The CPIO did not provide the desired information.
1
Order
Appellant : Present
Respondent : Representative of PIO, Shri Rohit Kumar, DD(M)
During the hearing the representative of PIO submitted that they had provided the requisite information vide their letter dated 11.03.2016 which is just and proper and the case should be dismissed. The appellant submitted that he was not satisfied with the reply received from the respondent as totally irrelevant reply was provided to him by the respondent.
On perusal of the case record, it was seen that proper reply was not provided to the appellant. A more comprehensive reply should have been provided to the appellant i.e. copy of policy under which such stoppages were allowed should have been provided to the appellant along with the reply to the RTI application.
Be that as it may, since deficient information was provided to the appellant, the respondent CPIO is directed to provide copy of the policy as discussed above to the appellant free of charge u/s 7(6) of the RTI Act within 10 days of the receipt of the order. For this purpose, CPIO/PIO, may take assistance of any other office/department u/s 5(4) of the RTI Act.
A short report about the despatch details of the revised reply to the appellant is to be submitted to the Commission within the same time period for perusal and record.
With the above direction, the appeal is disposed of. Copies of the order be sent to both the parties free of cost.
[Amitava Bhattacharyya] Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy (A.K. Talapatra) Deputy Registrar 2