Central Information Commission
A Muthu Manickam vs South Western Railway on 8 April, 2026
के ीय सू चना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
File No: CIC/SWRLY/A/2023/145769
A. Muthu Manickam .....अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
C.P.I.O,
South Western Railway
Divisional Office,
Works Branch,
DRM Office Building,
Bengaluru - 560 023 .... ितवादी/Respondent
Date of Hearing : 06-02-2025
Date of Decision : 11.02.2025
Date of SCN Hearing : 07-04-2026
Decision of SCN Hearing : 08-04-2026
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Swagat Das
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 11-09-2023
CPIO replied on : 22-09-2023
First appeal filed on : 03-10-2023
First Appellate Authority's order : 18-10-2023
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 17-11-2023
Information sought:
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 11-09-2023 seeking the following information:
"Under the Right to Information Act 2005, I request you to kindly furnish the following information here under.CIC/RAILB/A/2019/150933 Page 1 of 14
1. Please furnish information and Certify Copies whether the land bearing Old Survey No. 18, New No.27 land measuring 20 Guntas of land located at Ward No. 94, Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike, Gandhi Nagar, Bengaluru - 560009 situated under the following Schedule stated below. East : by Budha Society, Gandhi Nagar, Bengaluru West : by BBMP Corporation Girls and Boys High School, Gandhi Nagar, Bengaluru.
North : by 13/2, 6th Cross, Gandhi Nagar, Bengaluru. South : by Kanishka Hotel Compound, Gandhi Nagar, Bengaluru Land is belongs to Railway land ?
or Whether the said land is belongs to Sri. Ramalingeshwara Mutt, represented by Sri. Sha.Bra. Matadhipathi Chandramowleshwara Shivachary Swamigalu, Haranahalli, Shivamogga (Camp at 92/10, 12th C Main, 6th Block, Rajajanagar, Bengaluru) ?
2. Whether the above said land property is belongs to Railway ?, If yes, please furnish the following Certify Copies of the land, such as (a) Sale Deed of the land (b) Khata of the land (c) Copy of the Tax Paid Receipt as on date (d) Registration of the land (e) Mutation (f) Pani (RTC) of the land Certify Copies may please be furnish.
3. Please furnish Certify Copy of the Blue Print or Sketch of the above said land.(Old Survey No.18, New Survey No.27, Ward No.94, BBMP, Gandhi Nagar, Bengaluru -09.
4. Please furnish the following information and Certify Copies, whether the above said land bought by the Railway from Private Party or from Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (erstwhile Bengaluru City Corporation) or from Special Land Acquisition Officer of the erstwhile Mysuru Government ?, If yes, you may please be furnish information and Certify Copy about the amount paid by the Railway to Private Party or BBMP (Old BCC) or to the Government of Mysuru towards the land cost. A copy of the pay Order / Cheque / DD paid to any one of the above party ? Such certify copy may please be furnish.
5. Please furnish Certify copies of the letters written by the Railway Authority to various state agency on 08/02/1973, 27/02/1973, 01/06/1973, 14/05/1973, 20/12/1973, 27/02/1974, 26/03/1973 and 01/06/1982."CIC/RAILB/A/2019/150933 Page 2 of 14
2. The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 22-09-2023 stating as under:
"Since Your request RTI Application seeking certified copies of Land Plans of old Sy. No-18, New Sy. No.27 doesn't precisely state the Revenue village to which it belongs to that would be an out of question for s to proceed further in checking the all other documents you are asking for in para no.2, 3, 4 & 5 of your request application. Therefore it is hereby requested you to mention all particulars relevant to Railway and its part of functional thereof."
Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 03.10.2023. The FAA vide its order dated 18.10.2023, held as under.
"The parawise reply is enclosed herewith as per Annexure-A. Annexure-A dated 12.10.2023 is as under:
Since your request RTI Application seeking certified copies of Land Plans of old Sy. No-18, New Sy. No.27 doesn't precisely state the Revenue village to which it belongs to that would be an out of question for us to proceed further in checking the all other documents you are asking for in para no.2, 3, 4 & 5 of your request application. Therefore it is hereby requested you to mention all particulars relevant to Railway and its part of functional thereof."
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing on 06.02.2025:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Present through Video-Conference.
Respondent: Shri Satish Kumar, Junior Clerk, attended the hearing through VC.
The Appellant stated that the Respondent has not provided the relevant information as sought in the instant RTI Application.
The Respondent submitted that a suitable reply in terms of RTI Act has been given to the Appellant.CIC/RAILB/A/2019/150933 Page 3 of 14
Upon perusal of the written submission dated 31.01.2025, the Commission asked the Respondent that what would qualify as 'an admissible proof to establish larger public interest' in the instant case as asserted by the First Appellate Authority, he could not provide a cogent reply. The Commission further asked the Respondent that who was the then CPIO, he submitted that Ms. Ruchika Sharma, Senior Divisional Engineer, was the then CPIO. The Respondent submitted that he is not well versed with the fact of the case. He requested the bench for a Passover as his legal representative is on his way. The bench agreed to his request and granted a Passover. The matter was again taken up at the end of the board, but no representative on behalf of the Respondent attended the hearing thus has vitiated the proceedings of the hearing.
A written submission has been received from Shri Sanchith Shrivastava, Divisional Engineer, vide letter dated 31.01.2025, wherein the Commission has been apprised as under:
"The Respondent herein humbly submits as follows:
1. The Second Appeal preferred by the Appellant herein before this Hon'ble Commission is false and frivolous and hence to be dismissed in limine.
2. It is submitted that the Appellant herein has filed an application under RTI Act Vide Application 00138 15-09-2023 No.SWRBD/R/P/23/145769 dated 20-01-2025 seeking Information as mentioned In his RTI Application.
3. It is further submitted that, the Appellant has not filed the RTI Application in his personal capacity as "Citizen of India". But, he has filed the RTI Application in his capacity as "President, Dr.B.R.Ambedkar (Railway) Daily Travellers Association and the Application seeking the information is typed on the letter head of the said Association. Hence, on this ground alone, the RTI Application filed by the Appellant herein ought to have been rejected by the CPIO.
4. It is further submitted that the RTI Query was vague and does not mentioned any specific information regarding the Village Name in which the concerned land is located. Hence, on this ground, the CPIO rejected the RTI Application filed by the Appellant.
5. It is further submitted that, in his First Appeal, the Appellant had mentioned the name of the Village as Hanumanthapura Village, Yeshwanthpur Hobli. But the Appellant failed to submit the documents to prove that he is asking the relevant information in the larger interest of the General Public. Hence, the First Appellate Authority rejected the First Appeal filed by the Appellant.
6. It is further submitted that the Appellant did not submit the reasons for seeking the information in the larger interest of public in his second Appeal filed before this Hon'ble Commission and hence has not approached this Hon'ble Commission with clean hands. Hence, on this ground too, this Hon'ble Commission must dismiss the present Second Appeal filed by the Appellant.CIC/RAILB/A/2019/150933 Page 4 of 14
WHEREFORE it is humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Commission may be pleased to pass suitable Orders it may deem fit under the facts and circumstances of the case and dismiss this Appeal, in the interest of Justice."
Decision 11-02-2025:
The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case and perusal of the records, observes that the reply provided by the then CPIO Ms. Ruchika Sharma, Senior Divisional Engineer, vide letter dated 22.09.2023 is inappropriate and evasive and clearly an attempt to stonewall providing any information. Further Shri Satish Kumar, Junior Clerk, appearing on behalf of the CPIO, has come before the Commission completely unprepared and unaware of the facts of the instant case, which raises apprehension that information has deliberately not been given to the Appellant with a mala fide intent.
Simple harm assessment would reveal that disclosure of information in all likelihood will cause harm to offenders. Hence, denial of information appears to be deliberate and seems to be aimed at protecting the interest of offenders who obviously do not qualify as third party in the matter. Queries in the RTI Application under consideration are perfectly in tune with the objective of the RTI Act i.e. public participation to ensure transparency and accountability.
The Commission is anguished to note that Shri Sanchith Shrivastava, Divisional Engineer, has sent an official of the rank equivalent to an LDC (lower most rung in the ministerial staff below which only Group-D employees are there), to plead the matter before the bench and that too without any authorization letter and without explaining any reason for his absence. This approach violates the letter and spirit of the RTI Act and accordingly the Commission expresses severe displeasure on the conduct of Shri Sanchith Shrivastava, Divisional Engineer, and he is admonished for the same besides being called to show cause. The act of the Shri Sanchith Shrivastava, Divisional Engineer, tramples upon the citizen's right under the RTI Act as well as shows lack of respect towards the Commission.
In view of the above, the Commission deems it expedient to direct the Registry of this Bench to issue Show Cause Notice to the then CPIO Ms. Ruchika Sharma, Senior Divisional Engineer, for providing evasive reply and to Shri Sanchith Shrivastava, Divisional Engineer, for not participating in the hearing, as to why maximum penalty should not be imposed upon them under Section 20 (1) and 20 (2) of the RTI Act besides recommending disciplinary action against the then FAA.CIC/RAILB/A/2019/150933 Page 5 of 14
A copy of this order is marked to the FAA who shall ensure that a copy of this order is received by the erring officials. The FAA is further directed to ensure that under all circumstances, written submissions of the erring officials should reach the Commission within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order failing which ex-parte decision shall be taken.
In the meantime, the Commission directs the CPIO to facilitate an opportunity of inspection of the available and relevant records as sought in the instant RTI Application to the Appellant on a mutually decided date & time but within four weeks. The intimation of the date and time of the inspection shall be provided to the Appellant by the CPIO telephonically and in writing. Copy of documents that the Appellant desires during the inspection shall be provided by the CPIO free of cost upto 20 pages, for pages exceeding this limit, CPIO may charge prescribed fees as per RTI Rules, 2012.
In the process of facilitating the inspection and providing subsequent copies of the record, the CPIO is at liberty to withhold/redact third party information or any other information which is exempted from disclosure under Section 8 of the RTI Act read with Section 10 of the RTI Act.
The above directions shall be complied with by the CPIO within four weeks from the date of receipt of this order.
The First Appellate Authority is directed to ensure the compliance of the above order.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly."
Relevant Facts emerged during Show-Cause proceedings on 07.04.2026:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Present through Video-Conference.
Respondent: Shri Sanchith Shrivastava, Divisional Engineer & PIO present through Video-Conference.
I. Written submissions of the Appellant are taken on record.
II. The Appellant, during the hearing, reiterated the contents of his RTI application and earlier directions of the Commission and submitted that till date Respondent has not fully complied with the orders of the Commission and has not provided complete information except point No. 5 of the RTI application.CIC/RAILB/A/2019/150933 Page 6 of 14
III. Reply dated 07.03.2025 to show-cause notice issued to Ms. Ruchika Sharma is reproduced hereinbelow:
"This is to inform that Ms. Ruchika Sharma is presently not holding the post of Sr. Divisional Engineer, South Western Railway, Bangalore and hence, based on the inputs received from her, the below mentioned reply is submitted before this Hon'ble Commission. 1) Mr. A Muthu Manickam has applied under RTI Act seeking some information in his capacity as President of "Dr. B.R. Ambedkar (Railway) Daily Travellers Association" Kindly refer to "Annexure-A". 2) Subsequently on the directions of this Hon'ble Commission, the applicant Mr. A Muthu Manickam, appeared in person on 19/02/2025 and submitted a letter , a copy of which is enclosed as "Annexure-B". Along with this letter, he has enclosed his visiting card, it is found that, he is Secretary of Karnataka Pradesh Congress Committee (KPCC) Labour department. 3) As per RTI Act, the information sought can be furnished only to an individual who applies in his capacity as a citizen of India and not as an office bearer of any organization. On this ground alone, the RTI application filed by the applicant cannot be entertained.
4) Further, the information sought by Mr A.Muthu Manickam is not specific and contains vague and incomplete query. We have advised him to produce the complete details like Village name, Hobli name, Taluk name for the Lands located in Old survey number.18, New survey number.27 measuring 20 guntas of Land coming under the jurisdiction of ward No.94, BBMP, Gandhi Nagar, Bangaluru-09. Since the applicant has not provided the complete details as mentioned above, we are unable to provide the information."
IV. Reply dated 07.03.2025 to show-cause notice issued to Mr. Sanchith Shrivastava is reproduced hereinbelow:
"This is with reference to the above mentioned subject, Kindly accept my sincere apologies for not attending the hearing on 06/02/2025 pertaining to the above case. My absence is Bonafide, since on that day, I was held up in the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka & hence could not attend the hearing. Also you are hereby informed that, Respondent - South Western Railways has requested for nominating Central Government Standing Counsel before your Hon'ble Commission to represent them. Accordingly Department of Legal Affairs, Ministry of Law and Justice, Bangalore had nominated the undersigned Counsel to CIC/RAILB/A/2019/150933 Page 7 of 14 represent the Respondent in the above case, before this Hon'ble Commission. Shri. Sanchith Shrivastava, Divisional Engineer, S W Rly, Bangalore, could not attend the hearing in person due to urgent Railway Track Attention work required between Hejjala-Bidadi block section which is directly related to the passenger safety. Further there is no intention to avoid the hearing. Hence, for the above mentioned bonafide reasons, the concerned official and the undersigned counsel could not attend the hearing on 06/02/2025. It is humbly prayed that one more opportunity may be granted for hearing the Respondent. The copy of the Nomination letter issued by the Ministry of Law and Justice vide File No.141/2025/LIT/LC is enclosed along with this letter, for your kind reference."
V. Written submissions dated 05.02.2026 of the Respondent is taken on record and the same is reproduced hereinbelow:
"It is humbly submitted that the information sought by Mr.A.Muthu Manickam was not provided under Sec.8(1)(b) of RTI Act, since, it relates to a property, which is the subject matter of a dispute raised by one Sha Bra Chandramouleshwar Shivacharya Swamigalu in O.S. No.2251/2018, which is pending before Hon'ble Additional city civil Judge (CCH 36), Bangalore. Hence, the RTI Applicant is advised to approach the above- mentioned court to seek any information. Railway cannot reveal any information pertaining to the case in their fiduciary capacity. As per the legal advice sought by the department, information sought by Mr.A.Muthu Manickam could not be provided for the above mentioned ereasons.. The delay is due to the following reason.
Regarding the delay in complying with the orders passed by this Hon'ble Commission, the reasons are mentioned below:
1) The connected file was with the Railway Advocate and since he was not keeping good health, the file was handed over to department only on 10/01/2026.
2) On receiving the file, it was observed that the Information sought regarding the property CIC/RAILB/A/2019/150933 Page 8 of 14 "the land bearing Old survey No. 16, New survey No. 27 land measuring 20 Guntas of land located at Ward No. 94, Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike, Gandhi Nagar Bengaluru bounded 560009 East: by Budha Society, Gandhi Nagar Bengaluru West: by BBMP Corporation girls and boys high school Gandhi Nagar North: by 13/26th cross, Gandhi Nagar Bengaluru Booth: by Kanishaka Hotel compound, Gandhi Nagar Bengaluru The property bearing CTS No.459 belongs to Railway and the same is the subject matter of dispute in O.8. No. 2251/2018 referred above. It may be noted that, no such property as described in his RTI Application located at Old Survey No. 18, New survey No.27, ward No.94 Gandhinagar does not exist. In Bangalore city survey numbers were long back abolished by the Survey Department and only CTS number is in force. Moreover, the applicant has copied the schedule of the property from the plaint filed by one Sha Bra Chandramouleshwar Shivacharya Swamigalu in O.S. No.2251/2018. Presently pending before Hon'ble Additional City Civil Judge (CCH-36), Bangalore.
3) Since, the matter is pending before the Hon'ble court, any information pertaining to the said property cannot be provided by the Railway under fiduciary capacity, and the applicant might misuse the information sought. Moreover, whether the applicant is asking the information in larger public interest or not is not forthcoming in his application, Further it may be noted that the applicant is an office bearer of Congress party. Hence, there is a possibility of using the information sought for political purpose. Hence, his application was rejected for the above mentioned reasons.
4) The rejection of the RTI application by the CPIO & further by the Appellate Authority in first appeal is due to the bonafide reasons mentioned above."
VI. Updated reply dated 01.04.2026 of the Respondent are taken on record and the same is reproduced hereinbelow:
CIC/RAILB/A/2019/150933 Page 9 of 14"1. Yes, Land located at CTS No.459 measuring 1080.30 sq. mtrs. belongs to South Western Railway. (Property card dated: 11-01-1977 issued by Dept of Survey settlement and Land Records pertaining to P.T sheet No.159, City Survey No.459 is produced along with this reply).
Your Query pertains to 20 guntas land located in Survey No.18, New Survey No.27, ward No.94, Gandhi Nagar, BBMP. We don't have any records pertaining to the above mentioned land. But, South Western Railways is the Owner of land located at City Survey No.459, Ward - 94, BBMP, measuring 1080.30 square meters.
The Land located at Survey No. 18, New No.27, ward no.94, Gandhi Nagar, BBMP does not belong to Ramalingeshwara mutt, Shimoga on 05.03.2026. Hon'ble City Civil Court was pleased to pass an order dated:
05-03-2026 dismissing the suit in O.S No: 2251/2018 filed by Sha Bra Chandramouleeshwara Shivacharya Swamigalu against South Western Railway. Since the matter was sub-judice, this office was not having the file during the pendency of the suit. Hence, delay in furnishing the reply for your RTI query.
2. The suit property mentioned in your query is located at Sy No.18, New no.27, ward no.94, Gandhinagar (BBMP). We confirm that land measuring 1080 sq mtrs located at CTS No.459 belongs to South Western Railway.
For your query 2a) & d): Generally, lands are acquired by State Govt. and subsequent to acquisition, same is handed over to Railway. Hence, question of sale deed doesnot arise.
For your query 2b) & c): Since, Railways are part of Central Govt, they are exempted from paying property Tax to the BBMP. Hence, there is no Property Tax paid receipt. Since, there is exemption of Property tax, No katha is issued by BBMP. The Property Card is already enclosed along with this reply. Since the land belonging to South western Railway is located in CTS No.459, No RTC is issued by concerned Revenue Authority. Hence, the issue of furnishing copy of RTC/Pahani does not arise.
For your query 2e) & f) Since No RTC /pahani is issued, Mutation is reflected in the property card.
CIC/RAILB/A/2019/150933 Page 10 of 143. The Blue print or sketch of the land located at Sy No.18, New no.27, ward no.94, Gandhinagar (BBMP) is not available in our office. But we are producing the Map of Local Area No. 79 Kumara Park issued by JDLR, KR Circle, Bangalore showing CTS No. 459 located in ward No.94, Gandhi Nagar is enclosed along with this reply.
4. "No". The land is not purchased from any private party or BBMP. It is handed over to Railway by State Govt. Since the Land located at CTS No.459 was a Govt Land and in replacement of another land owned by Railways, this land located at CTS No.459 was given to Railway by the State Government..
5. The copies of letters allegedly written by the Railway Authority to various state agency on 08/02/1973, 27/02/1973, 01/06/1973, 14/05/1973, 20/12/1973, 27/02/1974, 26/03/1973 and 01/06/1982 are enclosed."
VII. Respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that complete information as per the documents available on record has been provided to the Appellant. He apprised the Commission that a court case was pending w.r.t the said land and the said case was recently dismissed by the Hon'ble Court on 05.03.2026 and the relevant files were not available in their office and was held by Central Government Counsel but still records were called and information as per the records was given to the Appellant.
Decision in respect of Show-Cause proceedings:
VIII. The Commission has carefully examined the entire records of the case, including the earlier order dated 11.02.2025, the written submissions of the parties, and the explanations furnished by the then CPIO Ms. Ruchika Sharma, Senior Divisional Engineer, and Shri Sanchith Shrivastava, Divisional Engineer & present PIO, in response to the Show Cause Notices issued under Section 20(1) and 20(2) of the RTI Act, 2005.
IX. At the outset, the Commission recalls that vide its earlier order dated 11.02.2025, it had observed that the reply furnished by the then CPIO was evasive and inadequate and had directed the Respondent public authority to facilitate inspection of relevant records and provide copies CIC/RAILB/A/2019/150933 Page 11 of 14 thereof to the Appellant. The Commission has also issued Show Cause Notices to the concerned officials for the lapses noted therein.
X. Upon consideration of the submissions made during the present proceedings, the Commission notes that the Respondent has explained that the matter pertains to a land dispute which was sub judice before a competent civil court and that the relevant records were not readily available as the same were in the custody of the Railway counsel during the pendency of the litigation. It is further noted that subsequent to the disposal of the said suit on 05.03.2026, the Respondent has retrieved the records and furnished an updated, point-wise reply dated 01.04.2026 to the Appellant, along with copies of available documents. The Respondent has also submitted that information as available on record has now been provided.
XI. From the material on record, the Commission observes that although there has been a considerable delay in complying with the directions of the Commission, the Respondent has eventually provided substantial information in terms of the available records and has addressed the queries raised by the Appellant. However, it is also evident that the direction regarding facilitation of inspection of records was not complied with in its letter and spirit within the stipulated time frame, and the compliance appears to have been delayed without adequate justification at the relevant time.
XII. With regard to the merits of the case, it is noted that the Respondent has provided a revised and detailed reply based on the records available, clarifying the ownership status of the land and furnishing relevant documents to the extent available. No further intervention of the Commission is warranted at this stage in respect of disclosure of information.
XIII. As regards the Show Cause Notices, the Commission notes that the concerned officials have tendered explanations stating that the delay occurred due to non-availability of records and pendency of court proceedings, and that there was no deliberate intention to deny information. Shri Sanchith Shrivastava has also tendered an unconditional apology for his absence during the earlier hearing citing CIC/RAILB/A/2019/150933 Page 12 of 14 bona fide official exigencies. Though the Commission does not fully endorse the manner in which the RTI application was initially handled, it is of the considered view that the subsequent compliance and explanations furnished mitigate the earlier lapses to an extent.
XIV. In view of the above facts and circumstances, the Commission is inclined to take a lenient view in the matter. Accordingly, the Show Cause Notices issued to Ms. Ruchika Sharma, the then CPIO, and Shri Sanchith Shrivastava, Divisional Engineer, are hereby dropped.
XV. However, the Commission expresses its displeasure over the delay in compliance of its earlier order and the casual approach initially adopted in handling the RTI application. The Respondent Public Authority is hereby advised to ensure strict adherence to the timelines prescribed under the RTI Act and to deal with RTI applications in a fair, transparent and responsible manner. The First Appellate Authority shall also ensure proper supervision in such matters to avoid recurrence of such lapses.
XVI. The Show Cause proceedings are accordingly disposed of and the matter stands closed.
Sd/-
Swagat Das ( ागत दास) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स ािपत ित) (Archana Srivastva) Dy. Registrar 011 - 2610 7040 Date Copy To:
The First Appellate Authority, South Western Railway, Divisional Office, Works Branch, DRM Office Building, Bengaluru - 560 023 CIC/RAILB/A/2019/150933 Page 13 of 14 A. Muthu Manickam Dr. B.R. Ambedkar (Railway) Daily Traverllers Association, 275, South Tank Block, Coromandel, Kolar Gold Fields, Karnataka - 563 118 CIC/RAILB/A/2019/150933 Page 14 of 14 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)