Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Shri Kunwarpal Singh Sawarn vs North Eastern Railway on 5 September, 2008

                        Central Information Commission
                                      *****

                                                        No.CIC/OK/A/2008/00320

                                                        Dated: 5 September 2008

Name of the Appellant              :      Shri Kunwarpal Singh Sawarn
                                          R/o S & T - 18, Railway Colony
                                          Hathras City, Mahamaya Nagar

Name of the Public Authority       :      North Eastern Railway


Background:

Shri Kunwarpal Singh Swarn of Izzatnagar filed an RTI-application with the Public Information Officer, North Eastern Railway, Bareilly, on 27 August 2007, seeking information regarding the number of cases in which the passengers were charged the unrevised minimum fare of Rs.4/- when actually it had been reduced by one rupee to Rs.3/.

2. The PIO vide his letter dated 27 September 2007 replied to the RTI- application. Not satisfied with the reply of the PIO, the Appellant filed an appeal with the first Appellate Authority on 18 October 2007 who vide his letter dated 12 November 2007 replied to it. Thereafter, the Appellant approached the Central Information Commission with a Second Appeal on 16 February 2008.

3. The Bench of Dr. O.P. Kejariwal, Information Commissioner, heard the matter on 29 August 2008.

4. Shri P.C. Jaiswal, Sr. DCM & PIO and Shri A.K. Kathpal, ADRM & Appellate Authority, represented the Respondents.

5. The Appellant, Shri Kunwarpal Singh Swarn, was present alongwith Shri Shishir Kumar.

Decision:

6. The Commission heard both the sides and noted that the Respondents had replied to most of the queries raised by the Appellant in the original RTI- application as well as the First Appeal. The only point at issue was the Appellant's demand for information on the number of cases in which the passengers were charged Rs.4/- as minimum fare when it had been revised to Rs.3/-. To give a brief background of the case: in the last budget, the Railway Minister had approved the reduction of minimum fare from Rs.4/- to Rs.3/-. Accordingly, a circular was issued to all the Stations to adhere to the new norms. According to the Respondents, the guidelines so issued were not absolutely clear to the staff of different Stations and it did happen that at some Stations the minimum fare which was charged was still Rs.4/-. This continued over a period of 2-3 months before the issue was finally clarified and settled and instructions were issued for charging the minimum fare as Rs.3/-. The Applicant wanted to know the number of tickets in which the minimum fare charged was still Rs.4/-. The Respondents stated that there were about five or six Stations at which the minimum fare charged was Rs.4/- over a period of 2-3 months. The Commission failed to see the rationale of this information being used by the Appellant. On asking the Appellant as to what he would do even if the information was supplied to him -- because it was impossible to locate the passengers who were charged Re.1/- extra and have this amount refunded to them, the Appellant stated that it was for him to decide as to what he would do with this information and his companion stated that they would take appropriate action when the information was received by them. The Commission considers this as an obvious demand for putting the Department under unnecessary and undue pressure and advises the Appellant not to file such infructuous RTI-applications in future.

7. During the hearing, the Respondents also stated that the same Appellant had earlier filed 13 applications incorporating 63 items of information ― all of which they had supplied and that in none of these 12 cases had the matter come before this Commission and this was the first case which had come to the Commission.

8. In view of the submissions made by the Respondents and the Appellant, the Commission dismisses this case.

Sd/-

(O.P. Kejariwal) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy:

Sd/-
(G. Subramanian) Assistant Registrar Cc:
1. Shri Kunwarpal Singh Sawarn, R/o S & T - 18, Railway Colony, Hathras City, Mahamaya Nagar
2. The Public Information Officer, North Eastern Railway, Divisional Railway Manager's Office, Izzat Nagar, Bareilly
3. The Appellate Authority, North Eastern Railway, Divisional Railway Manager's Office, Izzat Nagar, Bareilly
4. Officer Incharge, NIC
5. Press E Group, CIC