Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

B Usha vs Railway Board on 26 December, 2017

                                क यसूचनाआयोग
                     CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                                बाबा गंगानाथ माग
                             Baba Gangnath Marg,
                           मु नरका, नई द ल -110067
                          Munirka, New Delhi-110067
                          Tel: 011 - 26182593/26182594

                             Email: [email protected]

File No.: CIC/RAILB/A/2017/154599

In the matter of:

B Usha

                                                                     ...Appellant
                                              VS
PIO and Asst. Personnel Officer, R Indian's
Railway Integral Coach Factory, Chennai,
Tamil Nadu- 600038
                                                                   ...Respondent

                                                      Dates
RTI application                               :       18.01.2017
CPIO reply                                    :       20.05.2017
First Appeal                                  :       08.03.2017
FAA Order                                     :       25.04.2017
Second Appeal                                 :       28.07.2017
Date of hearing                               :       11.12.2017


Facts:

The appellant vide RTI application dated 18.01.2017 sought information on seven points regarding her deceased father Late Shri G. Balasubramani, copies of his entire service entries, copy of the nominations made by him in his service book, copy of no objection received from his three children for disbursing his entire terminal benefits to Smt. Jaya Mary, copy of his death certificate, copy of the marriage certificate of her deceased father and Smt. Jaya Mary, copy of the application format for appointment of next of kin of the deceased railway servant on compassionate ground etc. The CPIO replied on 1 20.05.2017. The appellant was not satisfied with the CPIO's reply and filed first appeal on 08.03.2017. The First Appellate Authority (FAA) vide order dated 25.04.2017 disposed of the first appeal. Aggrieved with the non-supply of the desired information, the appellant filed second appeal u/s 19 of the RTI Act before the Central Information Commission on 28.07.2017.

Grounds for Second Appeal The CPIO did not provide the desired information.



Order
      Appellant :         Present
      Respondent :        Shri P. R. Vishwanathan,
                          Deputy Chief Personnel Officer cum APIO
                          Railway Integral Coach Factory, Chennai

During the hearing, the respondent APIO submitted that they had provided the requisite information vide their letter dated 20.05.2017 and the First Appellate Authority (FAA)'s order dated 25.04.2017. The information furnished to the appellant is just and proper and hence the case might be dismissed.

The appellant submitted that he was not satisfied with the reply received from the respondent.

On perusal of the case record, it is seen that proper reply was not provided to the appellant on point nos. 2 and 7 of the above stated RTI application. A more comprehensive reply should have been provided to the appellant on these points. On point no. 5 the respondent had submitted that necessary records were not available. An affidavit is accordingly ordered to be submitted to the Commission affirming this point. The reply provided on point nos. 1, 3, 4 and 6 of the said RTI application is just and proper.

Be that as it may, since no desired information was provided to the appellant on most of the points raised in the said application, the respondent CPIO is directed to provide point wise reply on point nos. 2 and 7 of the above 2 stated RTI request, complete in all respects to the appellant as available on record (legible copies) in the form of certified true copies of the documents sought e.g. note sheet, letter, correspondence, e-mail etc. free of charge u/s 7(6) of the RTI Act within 15 days of the receipt of the order. For this purpose, CPIO/PIO, can take assistance of any other office/department u/s 5(4) of the RTI Act.

The respondent CPIO is further directed to send a report containing the copy of the revised reply and the date of despatch of the same to the RTI appellant within 07 days thereafter to the Commission for record.

The present respondent CPIO, is directed to submit an affidavit on point no. 5 of the said RTI application indicating the date of destruction / weeding out of the said records along with a copy of the order of the competent authority authorising such destruction / weeding out within one month of the receipt of this order with a copy duly endorsed to the appellant within the same time period.

With the above directions, the appeal is disposed of. Copies of the order be sent to the concerned parties free of cost.

[Amitava Bhattacharyya] Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy (A.K. Talapatra) Deputy Registrar 3