Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

Dewang Bankar vs Central Railway on 30 June, 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/CRAIL/A/2022/649768 -UM

Mr. DEWANG BANKAR
                                                                      ....अपीलकताा/Appellant

                                         VERSUS
                                           बनाम



CPIO,
O/o. THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF OPERATIONS MANAGER,
PIO/NODAL OFFICER, RTI CELL,
CHHATRAPATI SHIVAJI MAHARAJ
TERMINUS, MUMBAI, MH-400001



                                                                 ..... प्रद्वतवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing     :             07.06.2023
Date of Decision    :             30.06.2023



Date of RTI application                                               14.07.2022
CPIO's response                                                       04.08.2022
Date of the First Appeal                                              05.08.2022
First Appellate Authority's response                                  08.09.2022
Date of diarized receipt of Appeal by the Commission                  Nil

                                        ORDER

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

The PIO vide letter dated 04.08.2022 furnished a reply to the Appellant. Dissatisfied with the reply of the CPIO, the Appellant approached the FAA.The FAA vide order dated 08.09.2022, upheld the reply of the CPIO.

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 Shri Azad Kumar, STDM attended the hearing through AC.

The Appellant reiterated the contents of the RTI application and submitted that partial, false and misleading information was provided by the CPIO. The appellant further stated that the mentioned Trains before COVID Pandemic had Commercial Halts at Kopargaon. However post COVID revival, Commercial Halts were Abruptly Cancelled, he said and added that that there was no recommendation from Commercial Dept. for Cancellation of Commercial Halt at Kopargaon. In similar way information should have been provided by the PIO aa to whether there any recommendation from Operations Dept. for Cancellation of Commercial Halt at Kopargaon, he said.

The Respondent present during the hearing submitted that a suitable response in accordance with the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005, had already been furnished to the Appellant. The respondent further stated that as per the order of Ministry of Railway the time tabling process should be confidential from pubic, therefore, the information Page 2 of 3 was denied to the appellant. He also informed that except this train 40 plus pairs of trains are stopping at the kopargaon railway station.

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, 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.

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-पजं ीयक) 011-26182598 ं / Date: 30.06.2023 द्वदनाक Page 3 of 3