Central Information Commission
Akhilesh Chandra vs Railway Board on 9 April, 2019
Author: Neeraj Kumar Gupta
Bench: Neeraj Kumar Gupta
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/2017/161840
Akhilesh Chandra ... अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
1. CPIO, M/o. Railways, ... ितवादी /Respondents
Railway Protection Special Force
(RPSF),
HQ, Daya Basti,
New Delhi- 110035
2. CPIO, M/o. Railways,
Central Railway, O/o. The
Chief Security Commissioner,
RPF/HQ, C.S.T.,
Mumbai- 400001
3. CPIO, M/o. Railways,
Central Railway, O/o. The
Commanding Officer,
Thakurali-East,
Mumbai- 421201
4.CPIO, M/o. Railways,
Central Railway, DRM's Office,
C.S.T.,
Mumbai-400001
Page 1 of 5
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:
RTI : 09.03.2017 FA : 05.06.2017 SA : 04.09.2017
CPIO : Not on record FAO : 07.07.2017 Hearing : 08.04.2019
ORDER
1. The appellant filed an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), M/o. Railways, Railway Board, New Delhi seeking information on eight points, including, inter- alia: (i) Is it a fact that during the tenure of Shri Akhilesh Chandra as Sr. Commandant, 12 Bn RPSF, Thakurli, Mumbai from 11.10.2005 to 14.03.2007, Shri Atul Pathak was Sr. DSC/RPF/CSTM/Central Railway; and (ii) what action taken on letter dated 14.10.2006 of the then Sr. CO/12 Bn. RPSF, Thakurli addressed to the then IG/RPSF/Railway Board, New Delhi regarding biased attitude and discrimination against the then Sr. CO by the then DIG/RPSF Shri Mahim Swami, etc.
2. Being aggrieved with the response given by the CPIO/FAA, the appellant filed a second appeal under Section 19(3) of the RTI Act, 2005 before the Commission on the ground that information has not been provided to him. The appellant requested the Commission to direct the respondent to provide complete information to him.
Hearing:
3. The appellant participated in the hearing through video-conferencing. The respondent no. 1, Shri Sanjay Kumar Mishra, DIG/RPSF was present in person. The respondent nos. 2 to 4 participated in the hearing through video-conferencing. Shri Mohd. Afaq, Land Management, Divisional Engineer, Mumbai participated in the hearing through video-conferencing.
Page 2 of 54. The respondent no. 1 submitted their written submissions dated 27.03.2019 and the same has been taken on record. The respondent no. 2 submitted their written submissions dated 05.04.2019 and the same has been taken on record. The respondent no. 3 submitted their written submissions dated 19.03.2019 and the same has been taken on record.
5. The appellant submitted that complete information has not been provided to him by the respondent. The appellant submitted that he has received information from the respondents on point nos. 1, 3 and 5 of his RTI application.
6. The respondent no. 1 submitted that reply/information on point nos. 2 and 7 has been provided to the appellant. The respondent no. 1 submitted that letter as mentioned at point no. 7 is not traceable in their records.
7. The representative from Railway Board submitted that the information sought by the appellant on point nos. 4 and 6 should be provided from their department and she agrees to provide reply on said points.
8. The respondent no. 4 submitted that the information sought by the appellant on point no. 8 is not available on their records and same has been informed to the appellant vide their letter dated 12.04.2017.
Decision:
9. The Commission, after hearing the submissions of all the parties and after perusal of records, directs the respondent no. 1 to give affidavit to the Commission deposing that information on point no. 7 is not available on their records. A copy of affidavit should also be provided to the appellant, within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of this order.
10. The CPIO, Railway Board is directed to give reply to the appellant on point nos. 4 and 6 of the RTI application within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of this order.
Page 3 of 511. The CPIO, Railway Board and the CPIO, Central Railway, Mumbai are directed to establish that whether the letter as mentioned at point no. 8 of the RTI application has been received and what action has been taken on the said letter. The same should be informed to the appellant. If the said letter is not received/not available then both the CPIOs are directed to file an affidavit to the Commission in this regard and copy of the same should be provided to the appellant. The above directions of the Commission should be complied within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of this order.
12. With the above observations, the appeal is disposed of.
13. Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
नीरज कु मार गु ा)
Neeraj Kumar Gupta (नीरज ा
सूचना आयु )
Information Commissioner (सू
दनांक / Date 08.04.2019
Authenticated true copy
(अिभ मािणत स यािपत ित)
S. C. Sharma (एस. सी. शमा)
Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक)
(011-26105682)
Page 4 of 5
Addresses of the parties:
1. The Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), M/o. Railways, DIG/RPSF & CPIO-91, Railway Protection Special Force (RPSF), Northern Railway, Force Headquarter, No .6BN/RPSF, Dayabasti, New Delhi- 110035
2. The Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), M/o. Railways, PIO, Central Railway, O/o. The Chief Security Commissioner, RPF/HQ, C.S.T., Mumbai - 400001
3. The Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), M/o. RAILWAYS, Sr. Commandant& PIO/RPSF, O/o. The Sr. Commanding Officer, Central Railway, No. 12BN/RPSF, Bara Bunglow Area, Thakurali-East, Mumbai-421201
4. The Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), M/o. Railways, DEN(LM)/APIO, Central Railway, DRM' Office, C.S.T., Mumbai- 400001
5. The Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), M/o. Railways, Railway Board, Raisina Road, New Delhi-110001
6. Shri Akhilesh Chandra Page 5 of 5