Central Information Commission
Mr.Sohan Pal Varshney vs Ministry Of Railways on 21 March, 2013
In the Central Information Commission
at
New Delhi
File No: CIC/AD/A/2012/002665
Heard through Video conference.
Date of Hearing : March 21, 2013.
Date of Decision : March 21, 2013.
Parties:
Applicant
Shri Sohan Pal Varshney
R/o House No. 7/59
Subhash Marg
Aligarh - 202001.
Applicant was present at CIC.
Respondent(s)
Northern Railway
Station Suprintendent
Amroha Railway station
Amroha.
Representative : Shri Rajiv Tehran, PIO
Shri Kailash Chand, Supervisor.
Information Commissioner : Mrs. Annapurna Dixit
___________________________________________________________________
Decision Notice
In the Central Information Commission
at
New Delhi
File No: CIC/AD/A/2012/002665
ORDER
Background.
1. The Applicant filed RTI Application dated 25.7.11 with the PIO, Station Master, Northern Railway, Amroha. The Applicant wanted to know whether the consignment which were sent on 8.9.10, 29.9.10 and 8.2.11 were released at Amroha or not and to whom they were released at Amroha. PIO replied on 3.8.11 providing some information. Thereafter the applicant filed first appeal on 23.5.12 with the DRM office, Moradabad. On not receiving any reply from the FAA, the Appellant filed his second appeal before the Commission on 16.7.12.
Decision.
2. During the hearing the Appellant informed the Commission that three consignment were sent by him from Delhi to Amroha on 8.9.10, 29.9.10 and 8.2.11 and the PIO had acknowledged the receipt of only one consignment sent on 8.9.10. He wanted to know to whom the remaining consignments were released in Amroha. According to the Appellant these two consignments were to be sent to the Chief Medical Officer, Stores in Amroha. The Respondent on his part stated that the consignment sent on 29.9.10 and 8.2.11 were not received by them at Amroha. The Appellant then produced the bill tickets in respect of the two consignments sent on 29.9.10 and 8.2.11 by him as a proof of the fact that these consignments were indeed sent by him by the said trains. He stated that he is not willing to accept the Respondents' submission that the consignment sent by him were not received at Amroha, while leveling allegations of corruption on the Railway officials.
3. The Commission after hearing both sides and having noted that the proof of dispatch of consignments by train is available with the Appellant, directs the concerned PIO to furnish an affidavit to the Commission with a copy to the Appellant clearly affirming the fact that the consignments sent on 29.9.10 and 8.2.11 have not been received by them at Amroha. The Affidavit may be sent within 20 days of receipt of this order.
4. As for the Appellant's grievance that two consignments have not been received by the Railways at Amroha and that he has not been compensated for this loss, the Respondent informed that if he (Appellant) files his claim with CCM, Banaras after filling up the prescribed form then efforts will be made to settle the claim after the papers are found to be in order. PIO also stated that Appellant can write to the Supervisor for a copy of the claim form. Be as it may, the Commission holds that the redressal of this grievance falls outside the ambit of the RTI Act.
5. The appeal is disposed off with the above directions.
(Annapurna Dixit) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy (G.Subramanian) Deputy Registrar
1. Shri Sohan Pal Varshney R/o House No. 7/59 Subhash Marg Aligarh - 202001.
2. The Public Information Officer Northern Railway Station Suprintendent Amroha Railway station Amroha.
3. The Appellate Authority Northern Railway Station Suprintendent Amroha Railway station Amroha.
4. Officer in charge, NIC.