Central Information Commission
Santosh Kumar Mandal vs National Highways Authority Of India ... on 3 February, 2025
Author: Heeralal Samariya
Bench: Heeralal Samariya
के न्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ मार्ग, मुनिरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई दिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
द्वितीय अपील संख्या / Second Appeal No. CIC/NHAIN/A/2024/602998.
Shri. Santosh Kumar Mandal. ... अपीलकर्ता/Appellant
VERSUS/बनाम
PIO, ...प्रतिवादीगण /Respondent
National Highways Authority of India.
Date of Hearing : 30.01.2025
Date of Decision : 30.01.2025
Chief Information Commissioner : Shri Heeralal Samariya
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 24.11.2023
PIO replied on : 11.12.2023
First Appeal filed on : 11.12.2023
First Appellate Order on : NA
2 Appeal/complaint received on
nd
: 23.01.2024
Information soughtand background of the case:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 24.11.2023 seeking information on following points:-
"I want to get information under RTI Act 2005 about the project, Six laning of Bihar Jharkhand border (Chordaha) to Gorhar section of NH-2 from 249.525 km to 320.810 km in the state of Jharkhand (1) Which consultantcy has been authorised for independent engineer. (2) Name the team leader, material engineer, resident engineer highway and structure, highway engineer, bridge engineer and all key person of this project.
(3) Kindly provide me the work experience, feedback of previous worked consultancy and education qualifications of team leader, material engineer, resident engineer highway and structure, highway engineer, bridge engineer and all key person of this project. (4) Kindly provide the certified copy of educational qualifications verification copy of team leader, material engineer, resident engineer highway and structure, highway engineer, bridge engineer and all key person of this project."
The CPIO, Project Director, NHAI vide letter dated 11.12.2023 replied as under:-
"01. AE-M/s Theme Engineering Services Pvt. Ltd.
Page 1 02-04. Third Party Personnel informations could not be provided due to personnel. security."
Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 11.12.2023 which was not adjudicated by the FAA. Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
Appellant: Present Respondent: Shri Abhishek Mishra, Manager (Tech). The Submissions of both the parties were heard. Decision:
Upon the perusal of the case records & submissions, the Commission observes that an appropriate reply has been provided by CPIO. No further action lies. The Appeal stands disposed off.
Heeralal Samariya (हीरालाल सामरिया) Chief Information Commissioner (मुख्य सूचना आयुक्त) Authenticated true copy (अभिप्रमाणित सत्यापित प्रति) S. K. Chitkara (एस. के . चिटकारा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26186535 Page 2 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)