Central Information Commission
Udairaj Bharti vs Northern Railway Firozpur on 16 October, 2020
CIC/NRALF/A/2018/171006
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग,मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं या/ Second Appeal No.CIC/NRALF/A/2018/171006
In the matter of:
Udairaj Bharti ... अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO,
Sr. Divisional Personnel Officer,
Northern Railway,
O/o. the Divisional Railway Manager,
Divisional Office,
Hazaratganj, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh ... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:
RTI : 28.06.2018 FA : 13.08.2018 SA : 05.12.2018
CPIO : 12.07.2018 FAO : 30.08.2018 Hearing : 15.10.2020
The following were present:
Appellant: Shri Udairaj Bharti, heard through video conferencing.
Respondent: Ms. Lovely Gyan, APO, Northern Railway, Lucknow Division,
heard through video conferencing.
Page 1 of 5
CIC/NRALF/A/2018/171006
ORDER
Information Sought:
The Appellant filed an online RTI application on 28.06.2018, seeking information pertaining to case file of documents, issued by internal complaints committee, N. Rly., Lucknow Division, including, interalia, "Attested copy of entire case file pertaining to/containing the letter no. 324E/0- 111/E 3-1/116/Loose5 dated 13.09.2017 & 13.10.2017 including all file notings (PPs) & documents, records & related electronic data audio/video clips etc. if any, contained therein may be supplied."
The CPIO, vide letter dated 12.07.2018, responded to the RTI application and informed the Appellant that the final decision of the internal complaints committee in the said matter along with complete Inquiry report had already been communicated to him and no other material of case file containing Inquiry proceedings can be provided as per the provisions of Section 16 of Sexual Harassment of Women at workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 which prohibits any information relating to conciliation and Inquiry proceedings to be communicated in any manner. Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed first appeal dated 13.08.2018. FAA, vide order dated 30.08.2018, held that information had already been provided to the Appellant vide letter no. 324E/E3- 1/RTI/382B dated 12.07.2018 by Registered Post and copy of the same was enclosed.
Grounds for Second Appeal:
The appellant filed second appeal u/s 19 of the Act on the ground of unsatisfactory reply furnished by the respondent. He requested the Commission to direct the CPIO to provide the information sought for.Page 2 of 5
CIC/NRALF/A/2018/171006 Submissions made by Appellant and Respondent during Hearing:
The Appellant reiterated the contents of his RTI application and submitted that sought information has not been provided by the Respondent till date. The Appellant further submitted that due to non furnishing of information, he could not been able to defend his case. He contended that even the inquiry report as mentioned in the CPIO's reply dated 12.07.2018 was not provided to the Appellant. The Appellant relied on the contents of his second appeal and contended that provision of Section 16 of Sexual Harassment of Women at workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 is not applicable to his case, as he was neither the public nor press nor media, but was the accused in the said case. Thus, the desired information must be disseminated to the accused/appellant in order to defend him.
Per contra, the Respondent submitted Appellant's RTI application was duly replied on 12.07.2018 and the final outcome of internal complaint committee alongwith inquiry report had already been furnished to the Appellant. The respondent further submitted that as per the provisions laid down under Section 16 of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, the information sought for cannot be communicated to any person. Thus, the same was denied to the Appellant. On query regarding dissemination of sought information to the Appellant by severing it, as per section 10 of the RTI Act, the Respondent answered in affirmative. In response to further query to resend the copy of inquiry report of internal complaint committee, the Respondent replied affirmatively.
The written submissions dated 07.10.2020, filed by the PIO (Personnel), Northern Railway,Lucknow, were taken on record.Page 3 of 5
CIC/NRALF/A/2018/171006 Decision:
The Commission, after hearing the submissions of both the parties, perusing the records and considering the averments made by the parties, directs the Respondent to give fresh categorical reply alongwith due information after due application of Section 10(1) of the Act to the Appellant. The identity of the individual member, who may have expressed his opinion on any issue of complaint and also the identity of the victim should, however, be withheld/masked lest the disclosure of identity should endanger his life and liberty. The Respondent is further directed to resend the copy of inquiry report to the Appellant as per the RTI Act. The aforesaid directions be complied within 15 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, under intimation to the Commission.
With the above observations, the appeal is disposed of. Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
The appeal, hereby, stands disposed of.
Amita Pandove (अिमता पांडव) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) दनांक / Date 15.10.2020 Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स यािपत ित) B. S. Kasana (बी. एस. कसाना) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26105027 Page 4 of 5 CIC/NRALF/A/2018/171006 Addresses of the parties:
1. The First Appellate Authority (FAA) Northern Railway, O/o. the Divisional Railway Manager, Divisional Office, Hazaratganj, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh
2. The Central Public Information Officer Sr. Divisional Personnel Officer, Northern Railway, O/o. the Divisional Railway Manager, Divisional Office, Hazaratganj, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh
3. Mr Udairaj Bharti Page 5 of 5