Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

R. Manjunatha vs South Western Railway on 27 September, 2023

Author: Uday Mahurkar

Bench: Uday Mahurkar

                                       के न्द्रीयसच
                                                  ू नाआयोग
                             Central Information Commission
                                     बाबागंगनाथमागग,मुननरका
                             Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                               नईनिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067

द्वितीयअपीलसंख्या / Second Appeal No.:- CIC/SWRLY/A/2022/647468 -UM

Mr.R. MANJUNATHA




                                                                            ....अपीलकताा/Appellant
                                            VERSUS
                                              बनाम

CPIO,
M/o. RAILWAYS, ASC/RPF/YPR & CPIO,
SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY, O/o. THE Sr. DIVISIONAL SECURITY
COMMISSIONER, SECURITY DEPARTMENT, BENGALURU DIVISION,
BENGALURU, KARNATAKA-560023



                                                                        ..... प्रद्वतवादीगण /Respondent

Date of Hearing      :              26.09.2023
Date of Decision     :              27.09.2023

Date of RTI application                                                   03.04.2022
CPIO's response                                                           22.04.2022
Date of the First Appeal                                                  12.05.2022
First Appellate Authority's response                                      Not on record
Date of diarized receipt of Appeal by the Commission                      Nil

                                           ORDER

FACTS The Appellant vide RTI application sought information, as under:-

1. As per serial number 10 (iii) of the Directive No. 32 (revised) vide no. 2014/Sec (SPL/6/12 New Delhi dated 28.12.2017, furnish the copy of noting sheet, proceedings of Division Establishment committee held / constituted in the year 2019 at Divisional Establishment Committee, Bengaluru.

2. Furnish the copy of the order of appointing the Divisional Establishment Committee issued by the Division, Bengaluru along with the name of Chairman and members which has issued by the division Bangalore by forming committee in the year 2019.

3. Furnish copies of list of descending orders of non-gazetted stop (ISPF to constable) which has kept/ placed before the Divisional Establishment Committee to recommend for transfer to staff in the year 2019 also furnish list of employees to transfer who are recommended to transfer along with copy of committee proceedings.

4. You are requested to furnish certified.

The PIO vide letter dated 22.04.2022 furnished a reply to the Appellant. Dissatisfied with the reply of the CPIO, the Appellant approached the FAA. The order of the FAA, if any, is not on the record of the Commission.

Thereafter, the Appellant filed a Second Appeal before the Commission. HEARING:

Facts emerging during the hearing:

The following were present:

Appellant: Present through AC Respondent: Mr Shakeel Khan ASC, Present through AC The Appellant while reiterating the contents of the RTI Application submitted that he had sought the copy of noting sheet, proceedings of Division Establishment committee held / constituted in the year 2019 at Divisional Establishment Committee, Bengaluru. He claimed that the transfers are being done in violation of serial number 10 (iii) of the Directive No. 32 (revised) vide no. 2014/Sec (SPL/6/12 New Delhi dated 28.12.2017. He claimed that his uncle is one such employee who is suffering in this matter.

The Respondent submitted that the said information is not in public domain and so it will invade the privacy of the other RPF personnel. The information which the Appellant is seeking includes constable to sub inspector, he said and added that the committee proceedings are kept secret for transfer purpose.

The Appellant clarified that he requested the information for constables and head constable.

DECISION:

Keeping in view the facts of the case and the submissions made by both the parties, the Commission directs the CPIO to re- examine the RTI Application and furnish a suitable revise reply to the Appellant redacting the third party information, in accordance with the spirit of transparency and accountability as enshrined in the RTI Act, 2005 within a period of 21 days from the receipt of this order under the intimation to the Commission.

The Appeal stands disposed 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-पजं ीयक) 011-26182598 द्वदनांक / Date: 27.09.2023 Page 3 of 3