Central Information Commission
Mr.S Govindan vs Ministry Of Railways on 13 May, 2010
Central Information Commission
CIC/AD/A/2010/000260
Dated May 13, 2010
Name of the Appellant : Mr. S. Govindan
Name of the Public Authority : Southern Railway, Madurai
Background
1. The Applicant filed his RTI Request on 26.08.2009, with the PIO, Southern Railway, Madurai, stating that although he is posted as a Laskar his services are not being utilized for the last 4 years. He wanted the reasons for this neglect and he also wanted to know why the Watchman, Lorry Driver are being paid TA/DA ever when they are not working. The PIO replied on 17.09.2009 stating that the Applicant's services are being utilized by SE/W/VPT to perform the assigned duties. He was allowed to sit in the veranda to attend to the calls of Section Engineer/Works and to do the legitimate works assigned to him. Store watchman and lorry driver are being paid TA/DA whenever they go beyond eight kilometers to perform their official duties. Not satisfied with the reply, the Applicant filed his First Appeal on 22.10.2009 requesting the FAA for a thorough enquiry into the matter and to provide him with the correct reply. The Appellate Authority replied on 26.11.2009 stating that the Appellant in his original application is not seeking information but is more in the nature of an allegation. However, the de facto Public Information Officer has provided him with subjective information albeit not unknown to him. The FAA added that from the Appellant's appeal he is able to see that he is only seeking to enlarge the scope of his allegations of seeking information and advised the Appellant that the RTI Act is by no means a grievance redressal mechanism and that he may submit his grievance to the Competent Authority with supportive evidence. Still not satisfied the Applicant filed a second appeal before the Commission on 22.12.09 seeking the correct information.
2. The Bench of Mrs. Annapurna Dixit, Information Commissioner, scheduled the hearing for May 13, 2010.
3. Mr. Ram Kishore, Sr. DE cum PIO and Mr. Venkata Subramaniun, ADRM cum Appellate Authority and Mr. R.K. Kanun, APIO represented the Public Authority and were heard through video conferencing.
4. The Appellant was not present for the hearing.
Decision
5. The Respondent submitted that the Appellant was medically decategorized in 1974 and by 1986 he had lost almost all the vision in one eye, when it was decided that he was not fit for outdoor jobs. The Appellant went on leave in 1987 taking 21 days LAP, and 232 days LHAP while waiting for alternate posting. On return from leave he was given the post of Safaiwala at first and then of Chowkidar and later of a peon (Laskar). The Appellant was sent on outdoor duty for a few days every month till 2008 but eventually because of his lost vision field duty was not given to him any longer till the time he retired. The Respondent further added that the Appellant, who had retired from service early in 2010 has been intimated about all the reasons for the duties given to him and that there is no further information to be provided to him. The Commission accordingly holds that all information has been provided and rejects the appeal.
(Annapurna Dixit) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy:
(G. Subramanian) Deputy Registrar Cc:
1. Mr. S. Govindan, Lascar, SE/W/O/VPT, Railway Station, Virudhunagar 626001
2. The Public Information Officer, South Railway, Divisional Railway Manager's Office, Work Branch, Madurai
3. The Appellate Authority, South Railway, Divisional Railway Manager's Office, Work Branch, Madurai
4. Officer in charge, NIC
5. Press E Group, CIC