Central Information Commission
Mr.J P Shoke vs Ministry Of Railways on 20 March, 2012
In the Central Information Commission
at
New Delhi
File No: CIC/AD/A/2012/000170
Date of Hearing : March 20, 2012
Date of Decision : March 20, 2012
Parties:
Applicant
Shri. J.P.Shoke
Railway Qtr No.F188
Near Subhash Chowk
Murbad Road
Kalyan West 421 301
The Applicant was represented by Ms.Asha at NIC Studio, Thane
Respondents
Ministry of Railways
O/o Joint Director, Est.(Res) and CPIO
Rail Bhawan
New Delhi
Represented by : Shri. K.Mal, EDE(Res.)
Shri. R.kujur, DDE
Shri. Akash Bhardwaj, S.O
Information Commissioner : Mrs. Annapurna Dixit
___________________________________________________________________
In the Central Information Commission
at
New Delhi
File No: CIC/AD/A/2012/000170
ORDER
Background
1. The Applicant filed an RTI Application dt.28.3.11 with the PIO, Railway Board seeking information against nine points all related to his frequent transfers including reasons for the same. On not receiving any reply from the PIO, the Applicant filed an appeal dt.22.7.11 with the Appellate Authority reiterating his request for information. Meanwhile Shri. S.Sarkar, CPIO replied on 8.8.11 furnishing point wise information. Being aggrieved with the reply, the Applicant filed his second appeal dt.26.8.11 before CIC seeking complete comf. Decision
2. The Commission reviewed the information sought point wise and decided as given below:
Point 1 In this point the Applicant sought copies of 12 transfer orders which have not yet been supplied to him. The Respondents submitted that the matter pertains to the Central Railways, Mumbai and that information may be available in that office.. When the Commission queried as to whether the RTI Application has been transferred to the Central Railway, the Respondents replied in the negative. The Commission therefore directs the PIO to transfer this point to the PIO, Central Railway, along with a copy of this Order directing the PIO, Central Railway to provide information as available on record to the Appellant. With regard to the second part of the query in which the Appellant wants to know whether his transfers are justified or not, the Commission holds that the Appellant is seeking the opinion of the PIO which is not covered u/s 2(f) of the RTIA. Point 2 The Commission while holding that information sought against this query as to whether the instructions of Railway Board for implementation of reservation policies in the matter of posting and transfer are being followed by Central Railway or not does not fall under the definition of information u/s 2(f) of the RTI Act, however in the interest of the Appellant directs the PIO, Railway Board and PIO, Central Railway to allow the Appellant to inspect the file relating to his transfer on a mutually convenient date and time so that the Appellant can glean from the records the information required by him.
Point 3 After hearing the submissions of both sides, it is directed against this point that the Executive Director (Reservation) complete his enquiry regarding the matter of transfer of Applicant, and the PIO to furnish a copy of the enquiry report as also the action taken report to the Appellant by the 10th of may, 2012.
Point 4 The PIO, Central Railway to furnish information on the action taken by the Railway Board in respect of the 12 Nos. of alleged transfer orders . If no action has been taken the Appellant to be informed accordingly , giving the reasons.
Point 5 The Appellant wanted to know the rule by which his transfer out of Mumbai Division was desired by M.E.Railway Board.
The decision given in Point 2 holds good in this query too. Point 6 The Respondent submitted that there is no rule under which the transfer of Appellant is permitted out of Mumbai division though post of SSE has been decentralized in the year 1996. The PIO to formally intimate this fact to the Appellant in writing. Point 7 The decision given in Point 3 holds good in this query too. Point 8 The Appellant wants to know whether any opportunity was provided to him for defending himself in the matter of complaint based on which the transfer order was desired by M.E.Railway Board and was issued by competent authority.
The PIO is directed to furnish the information if available on record along with supporting documents . Point 9 The Appellant wanted a copy of the complaint based on which the M.E.Railway Board wanted to transfer him out of Mumbai Division.
The decision in point 2 holds good for this point too.
3. The information should reach the Appellant by 30.4.12.
4. The appeal is disposed of with the above directions.
(Annapurna Dixit) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy (G.Subramanian) Deputy Registrar Cc:
1. Shri. J.P.Shoke Railway Qtr No.F188 Near Subhash Chowk Murbad Road Kalyan West 421 301
2. The Public Information Officer Ministry of Railways O/o Joint Director, Est.(Res) and CPIO Rail Bhawan New Delhi
3. Officer in charge, NIC Note: In case, the Commission's above directives have not been complied with by the Respondents, the Appellant/Complainant may file a formal complaint with the Commission under Section 18(1) of the RTIAct, giving (1) copy of RTIapplication, (2) copy of the Commission's decision, and (3) any other documents which he/she considers to be necessary for deciding the complaint. In the prayer, the Appellant/Complainant may indicate, what information has not been provided.