Central Information Commission
Nicholas vs Northern Railway on 23 August, 2021
CIC/NRAIL/A/2019/644244
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबागंगनाथ माग,मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं या/ Second Appeal No. CIC/NRAIL/A/2019/644244
In the matter of:
Nicholas ... अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO, ... ितवादीगण /Respondent
/Senior Divisional Material Manager,
Northern Railway, Office of The
Divisional Railway Manager, Moradabad
Division, Moradabad (U.P)
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:
RTI Application filed on : 19.03.2019
CPIO replied on : Not on Record
First Appeal filed on : 20.04.2019
First Appellate Authority order : Not on Record
Second Appeal Received on : 19.08.2019
Date of Hearing : 22.07.2021
The following were present:
Appellant: Shri Nicholas participated in the hearing upon being contacted on his
telephone.
Respondent: Shri Purushotam Singh Bhagel, ACM, participated in the hearing
upon being contacted on his telephone.
Page 1 of 7
CIC/NRAIL/A/2019/644244
ORDER
Information sought:
The Appellant filed an online RTI Application dated 19.03.2019 seeking information on the following nine points:
1. KINDLY CLARIFY THE TICKET CANCELLATION RULE, MY TICKET WAS MADE FROM ANAND VIHAR TO GHAZIPUR CITY AND BOARDING WAS AT BAREILLY TIME OF BOARDING 23:10 HRS, TICKET WAS WAIT LISTED, COULD BE TICKET CANCELLED BEFORE 30 MIN PRIOR TO BOARDING STATION TIMING OF BOARDING WAS 2319 (30 MIN PRIOR MEANS BEFORE 2240 HRS)
2. IF TICKET IS MADE FROM ORIGINATING STATION OF TRAIN AND BOARDING POINT IS DIFFERENT, WHILE CANCELLING OF WAIT LIST /RAC TICKET, HOW TIME CAN BE CALCULATED (30 MIN PRIOR OF TRAIN DEPARTURE) FOR EXAMPLE :-TICKET IS FROM TRAIN ORIGINATING POINT LIKE ANAND VIHAR TIME 2000 HRS AND BOARDING AT BAREILLY 2310 ,AND TICKET IS WAIT LIST HOW, I WILL CANCEL MY TICKET ,ACCORDING TO WHICH STATION TICKET CAN BE CANCELLED PLZ SEE PNR NO 2357019205 RESERVATION WAS FROM ANAND VIHAR AND BOARDING BAREILLY 2310 HRS CAN I CANCELLED MY TICKET BEFORE 2240 HRS (30 MIN PRIOR OF DEPARTURE OF TRAIN).
3. IF TICKET IS MADE UNDER PROVISIONS OF BPT 1ST PART OF JOURNEY IS COMPLETED ,AND ONWARD JOURNEY TICKET IS REMAIN WAIT LISTED CAN ON WORDS JOURNEY TICKET BE CANCELLED EXAMPLE:- BPT TICKETIS NEW DELHI TO GHAZIPUT CITY 1ST PART OF JOURNEY IS TRAIN 14316 FROM NEW DELHI TO BAREILLY AND ONWORDS JOURNEY FROM BAREILLY TO GHAZIPUR , MAIN FARE IS FROM NEW DELHI TO GHAZIPUR RES UPTO BAREILLY AND FROM BAREILLY TO GHAZIPUR TICKET OF ZERO BALNACE . CAN BAREILLY TO GJHAZIPUR TICKET BE CANCELLED. PLZ PROVIDE THE RULE , AS MENTIONED RULE IS NOT CLEAR , DON'T SEND ME PHOTOCOPY OF PERTAINING RULE AS WRITTEN KINDLY CLARIFY THAT RULES IN CLEAR MANNER.Page 2 of 7
CIC/NRAIL/A/2019/644244
4. PROVIDE ACTION TAKEN COPY OF MY COMPLIANT NO. (COMPLAIN THROUGH WEBSITE) W/NR//MB/000487330,,,000487340..DATED 28.01.19 AND W/NR/MB/000490896,,, COMPLAINT THROUGH APP A/NR/MB/000498929 DT 28/2/19,,,A/NR/MB/000507128,,507130 DT 18/3 A/NR/MB/000613380 DT 30/3 ,,,A/NR/MB/000514376 DT 2/4,, A/NR/MB/000517489 DT 7/4/19.
5. PROVIDE REASON ALL COMPLAINT NO. IN POINT NUMBER 4 WHY REPLY WAS MADE TO ME BLANK, ALL COMPLAINT NO. IN POINT NO.4 REPLIED TO ME BLANK ,REGARDING THIS I HAVE COMPLAIN THROUGH APP COMS BUT BLANK REPLY WAS CONTINUED ,PROVIDE REASON OF THE ABOVE CITED
6. PROVIDE THE NAME OF PERSON DETAILED FOR DUTY AT WINDOW COUNTER NO.1 (GENERAL TICKET) AND WINDOW NO.2 ON 26 /01/19 AT 2100 HRS TO 2355 HRS. BAREILLY STN
7. PROVIDE THE NAME OF PERSON DETAILED FOR DUTY IN OFFICE OF CTI ON 26 /01/19 ,2100 HRS TO 2355 HRS WITH DESIGNATION .BAREILLY STN
8. PROVIDE TOTAL ABSENT TIME OF WINDOW NO.1 DUTY STAFF ON 26 /01/19 ( BETWEEN 2200 HRS TO 2320 HRS) CHECKED IT WITH CCTV FOOTAGE ,CCTV CAMERAS INSTALLED AT WINDOW NO.1 OF BAREILLY STATION PF NO.1 SIDE.
9. PROVIDE RULES , IF PASSENGER SUFFER MONETARY LOSS DUE TO RAILWAY EMPLOYEES ,WHAT ACTION /REMEDY AVAILABLE AGAINST RAILWAY STAFF AND HOW PASSENGER WILL RESTORE SAME.
Having not received any information from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 20.04.2019, which has not been adjudicated by the First Appellate Authority as per available record.
Grounds for Second Appeal:
The Appellant filed a Second Appeal u/s 19 of the Act on the ground of non- receipt of information from the Respondent. He requested the Commission to direct the CPIO to provide complete information sought for.Page 3 of 7
CIC/NRAIL/A/2019/644244 Submissions made by Appellant and Respondent during Hearing:
In order to ensure social distancing and prevent the spread of the pandemic, COVID-19, the instant hearing is being scheduled through audio conference after informing both the parties.
The Appellant stated that he has not received any reply from the Respondent.
The Respondent reiterated the contents of the written submission dated 16.07.2021.
The Appellant interjected to state different facts and averred different queries from the instant RTI Application. Upon queried by the Commission as to whether the Appellant has filed multiple RTI Applications on various subject-matters with the answering Respondent, he replied in affirmative.
The Commission remarked that though the date of the RTI Application is mentioned aptly in the written submission, the contents of the said RTI Application (except for information pertaining to the complaints filed by him) are different from the contents of the instant RTI Application in question. In response to the Commission's remark, the Respondent fumbled but could not provide a satisfactory reply to the Commission.
A written submission has been received by the Commission from Shri Naresh Singh, Asst. Commercial Manager, Northern Railway Moradabad vide letter dated 16.07.2021, wherein he has provided a comprehensive explanation regarding the RTI Application filed by the Appellant on 19.03.2019 and that the queries referred therein are not in concurrence with the instant RTI Application.
Decision:
Upon perusal of the facts on record as well as on the basis of the proceedings during the hearing, the Commission observes that the Appellant during the hearing Page 4 of 7 CIC/NRAIL/A/2019/644244 has referred to the contents of a different RTI Application (though certain queries sought in the instant RTI Application are similar in nature) as well as to his grievance pertaining to the train travel on the averred date. Despite the Bench read out the contents of the instant RTI Application during the hearing, the Appellant vehemently argued that adjudication on his another RTI Application should also be done since the contents of both the RTI Applications are pertaining to the same subject-matter. Besides, the queries sought by the Appellant in the instant RTI Application are in the nature of seeking clarification, reason etc. which is beyond the purview of Section 2(f) of the RTI Act. In addition, the queries framed by the Appellant in the instant RTI Application are incomprehensible and that the contents of the respective complaints filed by the Appellant are incorrigible in nature.
Consequently, the Commission as per the available documents on record observes that the Respondent has not provided any reply to the Appellant till date. The Commission finds it pertinent to remark herein that the CPIO has an obligation to provide a reply to the applicant, within the stipulated time-frame i.e., 30 days from the date of receiving the RTI Application, which has not been done by the Respondent. Hence, the Commission severely admonishes both, the Appellant for not putting-forth proper and relevant arguments pertaining to the instant RTI Application before the Bench as well as the Respondent, who has not even bothered to provide any reply to the queries sought in the instant RTI Application, even after receiving the hearing notice from the Commission. The Commission sternly warns the Respondent to be careful, mindful and watchful in future, and shall strictly ensure that timely replies/communications shall be sent to the applicants while dealing with matters pertaining to the RTI Act.Page 5 of 7
CIC/NRAIL/A/2019/644244 Be that as it may, since the written submission dated 16.07.2021 (contents pertaining to the action taken on his complaint are also a part of the instant RTI Application) has not been marked to the Appellant, the Commission deems it fit to direct the present CPIO to send a copy of the written submission dated 16.07.2021 alongwith all the enclosures/annexures to the Appellant, within 10 days from the date of receipt of this order.
With the above observations, the instant Second Appeal is dismissed. Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
The Appeal, hereby, stands dismissed.
Amita Pandove (अिमता पांडव) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) दनांक / Date: 23.08.2021 Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स यािपत ित) B. S. Kasana (बी. एस. कसाना) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26105027 Page 6 of 7 CIC/NRAIL/A/2019/644244 Addresses of the parties:
1. The First Appellate Authority (FAA) ADRM, Northern Railway, Office of The Divisional Railway Manager, Moradabad Division, Moradabad (U.P)
2. The Central Public Information Officer, /Senior Divisional Material Manager, Northern Railway, Office of The Divisional Railway Manager, Moradabad Division, Moradabad (U.P)
3. Shri Nicholas Page 7 of 7