Central Information Commission
S. Rajan vs Southern Railway on 22 September, 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/SORLY/A/2022/146292 -UM
Mr. S. RAJAN
....अपीलकताा/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO,
M/o. RAILWAYS, Sr. DCM & PIO/TPJ,
SOUTHERN RAILWAY, DRM'S OFFICE,
COMMERCIAL BRANCH, TIRUCHCHIRAPPALLI DIVISION,
TIRUCHCHIRAPPALLI, TAMILNADU-620001
.... प्रद्वतवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 15.09.2023
Date of Decision : 22.09.2023
Date of RTI application 20.07.2022
CPIO's response 22.07.2022
Date of the First Appeal 28.07.2022
First Appellate Authority's response 04.08.2022
Date of diarized receipt of Appeal by the Commission 27.09.2022
ORDER
FACTS The Appellant vide RTI application sought information, as under:-
"I am having RAC sleeper class tickets for 2 passenger for me & wife. Planned to travel from VRI to MDU Train No:/Name 16127 Guruvayur Exp. After chart preparation RAC seat allotted PI- S3/7 and P2-S3/7. Both the passenger having same seat number. Upper berth No. 8 passenger occupied the window seat no. 8 as per the your letter ref. No. Page 1 of 3 T/C.353/RTIA/RN/Accommodation during 6 AM to 9 PM. During day time 2 Nos. RAC passengers share the single window seat ? ( @ assume no berth allotted by TTE during travel up to their destination ). What Railway rule says about this scenario?"
The PIO vide letter dated 22.07.2022 furnished a reply to the Appellant. Dissatisfied with the reply of the CPIO, the Appellant approached the FAA.The FAA vide order dated 04.08.2022, furnished a reply to the Appellant and disposed off the Appeal. Thereafter, the Appellant filed a Second Appeal before the Commission.
HEARING:
Facts emerging during the hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant: The appellant attended the hearing through AC. Respondent: The respondent was not present despite notice.
The respondent remained absent during the hearing despite notice. The Appellant reiterated the contents of the RTI application and submitted that false and misleading information was provided by the CPIO.
DECISION:
Keeping in view the facts of the case and the submissions made by both the parties and after perusal of the documents available on record, the Commission directs the Respondent to re-examine the RTI application and 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.
Moreover, the Commission takes a serious view of the absence of the CPIO, Southern Railway, Triuchirapalli despite the notice. The Commission directs him to submit a written statement before the Commission, explaining his absence, along with the Page 2 of 3 comments of the First Appellate Authority, before 10.10.2023, both by post and by uploading on http://dsscic.nic.in/online-link-paper-compliance/add.
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: 22.09.2023 GS Page 3 of 3