Central Information Commission
Ajay Kumar Singh vs National Highways Authority Of India ... on 2 June, 2020
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
File No : CIC/NHAIN/A/2018/159076
Ajay Kumar Singh ....अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO,
National Highway Authority of India,
G - 5 & 6, Sector - 10, Dwarka,
New Delhi - 75. ... ितवादीगण /Respondent
RTI application filed on : 16/04/2018
CPIO replied on : 30/08/2019
First appeal filed on : 15/06/2018
First Appellate Authority order : No Order
Second Appeal dated : 22/09/2018
Date of Hearing : 01/06/2020
Date of Decision : 01/06/2020
lwpuk vk;qDr : fnO; izdk"k flUgk
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : DIVYA PRAKASH SINHA
Information sought:
The Appellant sought information pertaining to details of Right of Way (ROW) of Railway over Bridge (ROB) constructed by NHAI on National Highways.
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
The CPIO has not provided the desired information.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: No contact details were available and hence could not be contacted.1
Respondent: Pankaj Vishal, General Manager & CPIO, National Highway Authority of India, New Delhi, present on phone.
CPIO submitted that appropriate reply on the RTI Application has been provided to the Appellant on 30.08.2019, however, regretted that due to late receipt of RTI Application in his office there was a delay in providing the said reply. He further submitted that he received the RTI Application along with the First Appeal from FAA. He furthermore assured that such lapses will not recur in future.
Upon Commission's instance, CPIO submitted that per se there are no laid down rules/orders available on record for taking decision on the Right of Way (ROW) of Road over Bridge (ROB) to be constructed by NHAI. He further submitted that, NHAI submits the proposal of ROB to concerned Railway Authorities and on their approval/amendment of design, necessary work is carried out.
Decision The current milieu of the pandemic COVID-19 has necessitated the Commission to take some extraordinary steps in the disposal of cases to avoid further backlog and delays subverting the very purpose of RTI Act which includes inter alia hearing cases through audio conferencing. The instant case being one such instance where even so the Appellant could not be heard for want of contact details, Commission deems it fit in the interest of the letter and spirit of RTI Act to decide the matter based on the grounds of Appeal mentioned in the Second Appeal.
Commission observes that the instant Appeal has been filed on the grounds of having received no reply, while CPIO has informed during hearing that reply was provided on 30.08.2019 due to late receipt of the RTI Application. Based on the facts on record, no malafide intention can be ascribed to the CPIO for the delay caused in providing the reply on the RTI Application. Further, the reply provided is also deemed appropriate in light of the clarification provided by the CPIO during hearing regarding the basis of taking decision on ROW for ROBs built by NHAI. However, CPIO is directed to ensure that time stipulations prescribed under RTI Act are strictly adhere to in future. The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Divya Prakash Sinha ( द काश िस हा)
Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु )
2
File No : CIC/NHAIN/A/2018/159076
Authenticated true copy
(अ भ मा णत स या पत त)
Haro Prasad Sen
Dy. Registrar
011-26106140/ [email protected]
हरो साद सेन,उप-पंजीयक
दनांक / Date
3