Central Information Commission
Amarjit vs Northern Railway Firozpur on 28 November, 2024
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
File No: CIC/NRALF/A/2023/642469
Amarjit .....अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO,
Office of the Divisional Railway Manager,
Northern Railway, Station Road, Cantt.
Area, Firozpur - 152001 .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 25.11.2024
Date of Decision : 27.11.2024
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 07.04.2023
CPIO replied on : 15.05.2023
First appeal filed on : 30.05.2023
First Appellate Authority's order : 15.06.2023
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : Nil
Information sought:
The Appellant filed an (offline) RTI application dated 7.04.2023 seeking the following information:
"This application is in reference to the contract/agreement/tender of cycle stand outside the railway station of Fazilka city (Pin code: 152123) on the land of Railway Station which comes under your jurisdiction.Page 1 of 4
Kindly provide information point wise from January 2022 to till date as follows:
a. Certified copies of information containing number of times aforesaid tender/contract of cycle stand issued, along with the dates of each time of tender.
b. Certified copies of information containing details of firm/person allotted with the aforesaid tender/contract of cycle stand. c. Certified copies of public notice given for the aforesaid tender/contract of cycle stand.
d. Certified copies of information regarding cancellation aforesaid tender/contract of cycle stand.
e. Certified copies of information containing all the pages of resolution register related to the resolution passed for both allotting and cancellation of the aforesaid tender/contract of cycle stand. f. Certified copies of site map for the aforesaid tender/contract of cycle stand.
g. Certified copies of self-declaration given by each firm applying for the aforesaid tender/contract of cycle stand. h. Certified copies of information containing date of start and date of end of aforesaid tender/contract of cycle stand. i. Certified copies of list of applicants applied for the aforesaid tender/contract of cycle stand.
j. Certified copies of all pages of attendance register having entries of all the applicants present in the bidding of aforesaid tender/contract of cycle stand.
k. Certified copies of MOU signed by the firm/party in the aforesaid tender/contract of cycle stand.
l. Certified copies of information containing detail of members of committee formed 10 proceed with the aforesaid tender/contract of cycle stand.
m. Certified copies of information containing details of sanctioning authority to proceed with the aforesaid tender/contract of cycle stand. n. Certified copies of information containing instructions given by the government regarding the aforesaid tender/contract of cycle stand. o. Certified copies of information containing terms and condition mentioned in the aforesaid tender/contract of cycle stand. p. Certified copies of Videography made to record the transparent processes of hiding in the aforesaid tender/contract of cycle stand in the diskette, if any."
The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 15.05.2023 stating as under:
Page 2 of 4"In reference to above, you have sought information under RTI Act-2005, but the IPO No 97G 579514 dated 17.04.2023 of Rs. 50/- is addressed to Sr. DMM/FZR, DRM/FZR etc...., instead of Sr. DFM/FZR, the same cannot be encased as Sr. DFM/FZR is only having valid Railway account for FZR Division.
Hence you are requested to send fresh IPO or Booking receipt of Rs. 10/- in favor of Sr. DFM/FZR. So that the information sought can be further process for the necessary action."
Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 30.05.2023. The FAA vide its order dated 15.06.2023, held as under.
"In this connection you have already been informed to you vide this office letter No- 117-S/RTI/Sr. DMM/FZR/109/23, dated 15.05.2023 (Copy enclosed) for submission proper valid IPO/Booking receipt, but you will be not submitted PO/Booking receipt till dated. Now your Appeal returned back."
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Absent Respondent: Shri Ajay Sharma, Additional Divisional Material Manager/APIO, appeared through video conference.
The respondent reiterated the reply dated 15.05.2023 given by the CPIO and order dated 15.06.2023 passed by the FAA. They stated that original the RTI application was returned due to it not being accompanied with RTI fee in favour of the proper authority i.e. Sr. DFM/FZR and same was returned to applicant. However, till date the appellant has not filed any fresh RTI application along with proper RTI application fee.
Decision:
The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing the respondent and perusal of the records, noted that original the RTI application was returned to the appellant due to RTI application fee not paid in favour of the proper authority i.e. Sr. DFM/FZR. The respondent during the Page 3 of 4 hearing submitted that the appellant has not filed any fresh RTI application along with proper RTI application fee till the date of hearing.
It is not a case where the information is denied by the respondent, thus, it cannot be said that any mala fide is there in replying to the RTI application. It is noted that the appellant, instead of filing fresh RTI application along with necessary fee in acceptable mode, has filed first appeal and subsequently second appeal before the Commission and reasons for not paying the fee is not on record. The appellant neither filed any written objection nor presented himself before the Commission to controvert the averments made by the respondent and further agitate the matter.
In view of the above, the Commission finds that action of the respondent is in consonance with the provisions of the RTI Act as the application is not maintainable for want of payment of prescribed fee.
The appeal is dismissed accordingly.
Vinod Kumar Tiwari (िवनोद कुमार ितवारी) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स!ािपत ित) (S. Anantharaman) Dy. Registrar 011- 26181927 Date Copy To:
The FAA, Office of the Divisional Railway Manager, Northern Railway, Station Road, Cantt.
Area, Firozpur - 152001 Page 4 of 4 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)