Central Information Commission
Chandrashekhar Datta vs Ministry Of Railways on 24 February, 2022
Author: Uday Mahurkar
Bench: Uday Mahurkar
के न्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ मागग, मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई दिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
नितीय अपील संख्या / Second Appeal No.:- CIC/MORLY/A/2020/134234-UM
Mr. Chandrashekhar Datta
....अपीलकताग/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO
Chittaranjan Locomotive Works
PO- Chittaranjan, Dist Paschim Burdwan,
Pin- 713331
प्रनतवािीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 23.02.2022
Date of Decision : 24.02.2022
Date of RTI application 03.07.2020
CPIO's response 20.07.2020
Date of the First Appeal 30.07.2020
First Appellate Authority's response Not on record
Date of diarized receipt of Appeal by the Commission 05.11.2020
ORDER
FACTS The Appellant vide his RTI application sought information on 03 points, as under:-
The CPIO, Chittaranjan Locomotive Works, vide letter dated 20.07.2020 furnished a reply to the Appellant. Dissatisfied with the reply received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal, which was not adjudicated by the First Appellate Authority.
Thereafter, the Appellant filed a Second Appeal before the Commission.
HEARING:
Facts emerging during the hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant: Mr. Chandrashekhar Datta, Participated during AC, Respondent: Mr. AK Sinha, Senior Personal Officer, Participated during AC The Appellant while reiterating the contents of the RTI Applications stated that he had sought information regarding the equipments which were provided by C.L.W CHITTARANJAN for English lingua lab (ESL),to higher secondary schools of the Railway affiliated with CBSE and related issues. He further stated that the reply which had been furnished is not in accordance with the information sought in the RTI application. When queried, he stated the school was ordered to be closed by the Railway authority and he is concerned about what would be the consequences and the Designation/Post he would receive if the school gets closed.
The Respondent submitted that vide letter dated 03.07.2020 they had furnished a reply as per the provisions of RTI Act. When queried, he explained his points and said that in terms of language proficiency, a language teacher is expected to have competence, fluency and accuracy in English and it has to be practiced throughout the academic year. He further submitted that the concerned Principal had purchased audio tape recorders for English assessment done in classes X and XII for ASL (Assessment for Speaking and Listening) and in the end assistance was being provided by teachers and students.
DECISION:
Keeping in view the facts of the case and the submissions made by both the parties, the Commission directs the Respondent to furnish a Suitable and an updated revised reply to the Appellant, stating the factual situation regarding the information sought, strictly in accordance with the spirit of transparency and accountability as enshrined in the RTI Act, 2005 within a period of 21 days from the receipt of this order under the intimation to the Commission.
The Appeal stands disposed accordingly.
(Uday Mahurkar) (उिय माहूरकर) (Information Commissioner) (सूचना आयुक्त) Authenticated true copy (अभिप्रमाणित एवं सत्यापित प्रतत) (R. K. Rao) (आर. के. राव) (Dy. Registrar) (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26182598 / [email protected] दिनांक / Date: 24.02.2022