Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

Suresh Kumar vs Northern Railway Firozpur on 23 January, 2023

Author: Uday Mahurkar

Bench: Uday Mahurkar

                                      के न्द्रीयसच
                                                 ू नाआयोग
                          Central Information Commission
                                    बाबागगं नाथमागग,मुननरका
                           Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                            नईनिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067

द्वितीयअपीलसंख्या / Second Appeal No.:- CIC/NRALF/A/2022/125285 -UM

Mr. Suresh Kumar
                                                                         ....अपीलकताा/Appellant



                                        VERSUS
                                          बनाम

CPIO
The CPIO/ Nodal Officer (RTI Cell)
O/O THE DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER
NORTHERN RAILWAY FEROZEPUR CANTT-152001.



                                                              .... प्रद्वतवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing     :            19.01.2023
Date of Decision    :            23.01.2023



Date of RTI application                                                  27.07.2022
CPIO's response                                                          Not on record
Date of the First Appeal                                                 11.03.2022
First Appellate Authority's response                                     Not on record
Date of diarized receipt of Appeal by the Commission                     Nil

                                       ORDER

FACTS The Appellant vide RTI application sought information, as under:-

Dissatisfied due to non-receipt of any reply from the CPIO, the appellant approached the FAA. The order of the FAA, if any, is not on the record of the Commission. Thereafter, the Appellant filed a Second Appeal before the Commission.

HEARING:

Facts emerging during the hearing:

The following were present:

Appellant: The appellant was not present despite the notice. Respondent: The respondent Shri Amit Kumar, DPO attended the hearing through AC.

The Appellant remained absent during the hearing despite notice. The Respondent present during the hearing submitted that a suitable response in accordance with the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005, had already been furnished to the Appellant. The Page 2 of 3 respondent further stated that the appellant's grievance was already resolved but yet he is filing RTI for the delay which was because of justifiable reasons.

DECISION:

Keeping in view the facts of the case and the submissions made by the respondent and after perusal of the documents available on record, the Commission directs the Respondent to furnish correct and complete information to the Appellant, free of cost, in accordance with the spirit of transparency and accountability as enshrined in the RTI Act, 2005 within a period of 21 days from the date of receipt of this order under the intimation to the Commission.

The Appeal stands disposed of accordingly.

(Uday Mahurkar) (उदय माहूरकर) ू ना आयुक्त) (Information Commissioner) (सच Authenticated true copy (अद्विप्रमाद्वणत एवं सत्याद्वपत प्रद्वत) (R. K. Rao) (आर.के . राव) (Dy. Registrar) (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26182598 द्वदनांक / Date: 23.01.2023 Page 3 of 3