Central Information Commission
Mr.Pushpendra Singh Rathore vs Ministry Of Shipping,Road Transport ... on 20 January, 2014
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
ROOM NO. 329, SECOND FLOOR, CWING
August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place,
New Delhi110066
Tel. No. 911126162662
F. No. CIC/SS/A/2013/002367YA
Date of hearing :20th January, 2014
Date of decision :20 thJanuary, 2014
Appellant : Shri P.S. Rathore, (Present)
Shahdara (Delhi).
Respondent : Shri U.D. Bhargava, PIO, Ministry of Road
Transport Shri Anup, NHAI Shri Kuljit Singh, Transport Deptt. Min. Road Transport & Highways, New Delhi.
Information Commissioner :Shri Yashovardhan Azad Relevant fact emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 14/06/2013
PIO Replied on : No reply given.(RTI transferred on
dated12/08/2013)
First appeal filed on : 11/07/2013
First Appellate Authority order :No order passed
Second Appeal received on : 30/09/2013
Information sought :
The appellant had sought information in various points relating to overloaded vehicles plying on National Highways. Relevant facts emerging during hearing :
The appellant filed an RTI application on 14.6.13 seeking information on a number of points relating to action taken against overloading of vehicles on National Highways. The appellant stated that whatever information was received by him did not answer his specific queries. The respondent (Ministry of Road Transport & Highways) stated that the RTI application was replied to on August 12, 2013 transferring it to PIO, NHAI, and other PIOs of State Transport Departments, who had the desired information. While information held by NHAI and the Ministry was provided to the appellant, that pertaining to the States which was not held by them, was transferred to the concerned PIOs of the States. The appellant pointed out the queries on which information was not provided by the Ministry and NHAI.
The respondents from the Ministry and the NHAI agreed to provide the above information to the appellant, if he indicated the specific points on which information was sought.
Decision:
The respondents may set up a mutually convenient time with the appellant during which the latter can visit the offices and inspect the documents and take certified copies of the specific information sought by him free of cost.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly (Yashovardhan Azad) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against application and payment of the charges prescribed under the Act to the CPIO of this Commission.
(K.V.Mathew) Deputy Registrar