Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

Vijay Kumar Khajuria vs Northern Railway Firozpur on 31 January, 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/NRALF/A/2022/607201-UM

Mr. Vijay Kumar Khajuria
                                                                          ....अपीलकताा/Appellant
                                         VERSUS
                                           बनाम
CPIO
The CPIO/ Nodal Officer (RTI Cell)
O/o The Sr. Divisional Optns. Manager,
Northern Railway, Firozpur Division,
Firozpur, Punjab-152001
                                                   .... प्रद्वतवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing     :             30.01.2023
Date of Decision    :             31.01.2023

Date of RTI application                                                   25.10.2021
CPIO's response                                                           23.11.2021
Date of the First Appeal                                                  29.12.2021
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:-

The CPIO vide letter dated 23.11.2021, furnished a reply to the Appellant. Dissatisfied with the reply received from the PIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal. 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: The appellant attended the hearing through AC. Respondent: The respondent Shri Rajeev Kumar Sabharwal, Asst. Operations Manager attended the hearing through AC.

The Appellant reiterated the contents of the RTI application and submitted that no response was furnished to him by the CPIO. 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.

DECISION:

Keeping in view the facts of the case and the submissions made by the respondent and after perusal of the documents available on record, the Commission directs the Respondent to provide an updated and concise revised reply 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)
                                                (Information Commissioner) (सच      ु )
                                                                             ू ना आयक्त
Authenticated true copy

(अद्विप्रमाद्वणत एवं सत्याद्वपत प्रद्वत) (R. K. Rao) (आर.के . राव) (Dy. Registrar) (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26182598 द्वदनांक / Date: 31.01.2023 Page 2 of 2