Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

Surender Singh vs Northern Railway on 7 December, 2022

Author: Uday Mahurkar

Bench: Uday Mahurkar

                                       के न्द्रीयसच
                                                  ू नाआयोग
                             Central Information Commission
                                     बाबागंगनाथमागग,मुननरका
                             Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                               नईनिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067

द्वितीयअपीलसंख्या / Second Appeal No.:- CIC/NRAIL/A/2021/663055 -UM

Mr.SURENDER SINGH

                                                                       ....अपीलकताा/Appellant
                                            VERSUS
                                              बनाम
CPIO
NORTHERN RAILWAY, DRM OFFICE,
STATE ENTRY ROAD NEW DELHI-110055.



                                                                       प्रद्वतवादीगण /Respondent

Date of Hearing      :              06.12.2022
Date of Decision     :              07.12.2022

Date of RTI application                                               12.11.2021
CPIO's response                                                       16/17.11.2021
Date of the First Appeal                                              18.11.2021
First Appellate Authority's response                                  07.12.2021
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 16/17.11.2021, furnished a reply to the Appellant. Dissatisfied with the reply received from the PIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal. The FAA vide order dated 07.12.2021, furnished a reply to the Appellant.

Thereafter, the Appellant filed a Second Appeal before the Commission.

HEARING:

Facts emerging during the hearing:

The following were present:

Appellant: Absent Respondent: Mr. Ravinder Kumar Pathak, DPO General and Mr. Govind Raj Meena O.S, attended the hearing.

The Appellant remained absent during the hearing.

The Respondent while reiterating the contents of the RTI Application stated that the Appellant had sought a copy of his answer sheet and answer key of the exam etc. He submitted that vide letter dated 15.11.2021 and 07.12.2021, they had furnished a reply as per record available in their office. He stated that the selection process was not completed but the copy of answer sheet and answer key of the Appellant has been furnished to him. Hence, no further information remained to be provided to the Appellant, he said.

The Commission was in receipt of a written submission by the Respondent dated 02.12.2022 which is taken on record.

The Appellant was not present to contest the submissions of the Respondent.

DECISION:

The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, submission made by the Respondent and perusal of records, observed that an appropriate reply has been furnished by the CPIO as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005. No further intervention by the Commission is required in the mater.

The Appeal stands disposed accordingly.

(Uday Mahurkar) (उदय माहूरकर) ू ना आयुक्त) (Information Commissioner) (सच Authenticated true copy (अद्विप्रमाद्वणत एवं सत्याद्वपत प्रद्वत) (R. K. Rao) (आर.के . राव) (Dy. Registrar) (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26182598 द्वदनांक / Date: 07.12.2022 Page 2 of 2