Central Information Commission
Durgesh Govil vs Railway Board on 21 December, 2021
CIC/RAILB/A/2019/153265
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/RAILB/A/2019/153265
In the matter of:
Durgesh Govil ... अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO, ... ितवादीगण /Respondent
/Director Vigilance (Int.) Railway Board,
Rail Bhawan, New Delhi- 110001
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:
RTI Application filed on : 09.09.2017
CPIO replied on : 09.04.2019
First Appeal filed on : 16.09.2019
First Appellate Authority order : 10.10.2019
Second Appeal received on : 06.11.2019
Date of Hearing : 27.10.2021
The following were present:
Appellant: Shri Durgesh Govil, participated in the hearing through intra-video
conferencing from Central Information Commission.
Respondent: Shri Srinivas Malladi, CPIO & Director Vigilance (E) - I, Railway
Board and Shri Sarfaraj Alam, SO, participated in the hearing through intra-video
conferencing from Central Information Commission.
Page 1 of 5
CIC/RAILB/A/2019/153265
ORDER
Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI Application dated 09.09.2017 seeking information on the following two points:
1) "How many Vigilance cases have been initiated by Railway Board Vigilance against officers dealing with Delhi-Rewari Gauge Conversion Project 2nd line executed by Rail Vikas Nigam Limited. How many vigilance cases have been finalized.
2) How many Vigilance cases have been initiated by Railway Board Vigilance against officers dealing with Rewari-Ringus-Phulera Gauge Conversion Project line executed by Rail Vikas Nigam Limited. How many vigilance cases have been finalized."
Shri Srinivas Malladi, CPIO & Director Vigilance (E) - I, Railway Board, New Delhi vide letter dated 09.04.2019, informed the Appellant as under:
"It is to state that the information sought by you vide your above quoted application is exempt from disclosure under Section 8(1) (j) of the Right to Information Act, 2005, and instructions issued by Central Vigilance Commission vide Circular No. 07.04.2013 dated 04.04.2013 which is self explanatory."
Being dissatisfied, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 16.09.2019. The First Appellate Authority vide order dated 10.10.2019, denied the information sought in the instant RTI Application under Section 8(1) (j) of RTI Act.
Grounds for Second Appeal:
The Appellant filed a Second Appeal u/s 19 of the Act on the ground of unsatisfactory reply furnished by the Respondent. Appellant requested the Commission to direct the CPIO to provide complete information sought for.
Submissions made by Appellant and Respondent during Hearing:
The Appellant stated that he has not received the complete information qua the instant RTI Application. Upon being queried by the Commission to establish larger Page 2 of 5 CIC/RAILB/A/2019/153265 Public Interest while seeking third party information exempted under Section 8 (1)
(j) of the RTI Act, the Appellant could not provide a cogent reply.
The Respondent submitted that sufficient reply has been provided to the Appellant vide letter dated 09.04.2019. Upon being queried by the Commission to explain the reason for providing such tardy reply beyond the stipulated time frame as per the provisions of the RTI Act, the Respondent submitted that they have received the instant RTI Application on 08.04.2019 and accordingly replied it on 09.04.2019.
A written submission has been received by the Commission from Shri Srinivas Malladi, Director Vigilance (E) & CPIO, Railway Board, vide letter dated 18.10.2021 and the same has been marked to the Appellant, wherein the Commission has been apprised as under:
Page 3 of 5CIC/RAILB/A/2019/153265 Decision:
Upon perusal of the facts on record as well as on the basis of the proceedings during the hearing, the Commission observes that adequate reply has been provided by the Respondent qua the instant RTI Application and the same is being upheld. Hence, the Commission finds no further scope of intervention in the instant matter.
With the above observations, the instant Second 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: 21.12.2021 Page 4 of 5 CIC/RAILB/A/2019/153265 Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स यािपत ित) B. S. Kasana (बी. एस. कसाना) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26105027 Addresses of the parties:
1. The First Appellate Authority (FAA) Execution Director Vigilance (E), Railway Board, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi-110001
2. The Central Public Information Officer /Director Vigilance (Int.) Railway Board, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi- 110001
3. Shri Durgesh Govil Page 5 of 5