Central Information Commission
Rinchen Sherpa vs Ministry Of Railways (Railway Board) on 9 January, 2025
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
File No: CIC/MORLY/C/2023/637677
Rinchen Sherpa ....िशकायतकता /Complainant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO,
Deputy Director, RTI Cell, Railway Board,
Rail Bhawan, New Delhi - 110001 .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 02.01.2025
Date of Decision : 08.01.2025
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari
Relevant facts emerging from complaint:
RTI application filed on : 22.06.2023
CPIO replied on : 21.07.2023
First appeal filed on : Not on record
First Appellate Authority's order : Not on record
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : Nil
Information sought:
The Complainant filed an RTI application (online) dated 22.06.2023 seeking the following information:
"1. RB had issued letter no.2018-E (SCT) (/25/9 dated 03.05.2023 addressed to RCF, Kapurthala, providing clarification regarding procedure to be followed prior to effecting reservations in the matter of promotions by all departments of the Zonal Railways Page 1 of 4
2. RB through letter no. 2018-E(SCT)1/25/9 dated 24.05.2023 addressed to RCF, Kapurthala, informed them that RB has now decided to keep in abeyance the letter mentioned under (1) above, until further orders.
Please provide information on the following-
a) Reason for deciding to keep the above letter mentioned under (1) in abeyance, until further orders.
b) Till such time, will the upgradation process circulated vide RBE 155/2022 be kept on hold.
c) Although letters were addressed specifically to RCF, Kapurthala, will the same instructions hold good over the rest of the other Zonal Railways in the matter of the upgradation of posts as per RBE 155/2022."
The CPIO furnished a reply to the complainant on 21.07.2023 stating as under:
"Item No. 1-2. The information sought by the applicant is in the nature of query/clarification. As such, the same is not covered under Section 2 (f) of RTI Act 2005 as per DOP&T OM No. 1/18/2011-IR dated 16.09.2011. However, a copy of Board's letter no. 2023- (SCT)1/25/8 dated 14.07.2023 is enclosed."
Being dissatisfied, the complainant failed to file a First Appeal.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, complainant approached the Commission with the instant Complaint.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Complainant: Absent Respondent: Shri A S Bhavani, CPIO, and Shri Kumar Vishal, SO, appeared in person.
The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that they had filed detailed written submissions dated 20.12.2024 stating complete facts of the case and requested the Commission to place the same on record. The relevant paras of the written submission are reproduced as under:Page 2 of 4
"The RTI application of the applicant Ms. Rinchen Sherpa, dated 22.06.2023 was received on 22.06.2023. As per the information asked, it was found that the same was in the nature of query clarification / reason etc. which is not covered under RTI Act. However, copy of circular dealing with reservation in up gradation was provided to the applicant along with the reply furnished on 21.07.23 i. e. within a period of one month from the receipt of the application, so there is no delay in giving the reply to the applicant by the concerned CPIO.
In this regard, it may be clarified that Railway Board vide circular no. RBE 155/2022 dt 17.11.22 issued necessary orders for upgrading of the pay scale of 46 group 'C' categories of certain departments followed by clarification issued vide subsequent letter dt 1.12 2022.
Still clarifications were sought from various Zonal Railways including RCF, Kapurthala w.r.t application of rule of reservation in upgradation in cadre restructuring. For further examination of the case, it was decided to keep in abeyance the Board's letter dated 03.05.2023 addressed to RCF/ Kapurthala and after a thorough, examination, clarification to all zonal Railways was issued vide Board's letter dt 14.7.23 (RBE NO. 91/2023) and copy of the same has been provided to the applicant for information.
In view of the above it may kindly b appreciated that there is no delay on the part of CPIO to furnish reply to the applicant. Further for better information and guidance of the applicant, relevant circulars also provided."
The respondent submitted that a copy of the aforesaid written submissions along with enclosures were sent to the complainant on her email id and copy of the same is placed on record.
Decision The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing the respondent and perusal of the records, noted that it was not the case wherein reply was not given by the respondent. The respondent has replied within the time frame and a copy of the written submission filed by them was also served to the complainant.
Page 3 of 4The complainant neither filed any written objection nor presented herself before the Commission to controvert the averments made by the respondent and further agitate the matter. The written submissions given by the respondent are taken on record. The Commission finds no infirmity in the reply given by the respondent.
It is noted that the instant matter is a complaint filed under Section 18 of the RTI Act. Hence, the only adjudication required to be made by the Commission is to determine if the information has been denied with a mala fide intention or unreasonable cause to the information seeker. Perusal of the records reveals that due reply has been given to the complainant. No mala fide was established on part of the CPIO in this case. Hence, the Commission finds no scope of intervention in the instant complaint.
The Complaint is disposed of accordingly.
Vinod Kumar Tiwari (िवनोद कुमार ितवारी) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स ािपत ित) (S. Anantharaman) Dy. Registrar 011- 26181927 Date Page 4 of 4 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)