Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

N Arulmani vs Ut Of Puducherry on 25 March, 2026

                                                     CIC/UTPON/A/2024/140022

                                    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/UTPON/A/2024/140022

N Arulmani                                                  ... अपीलकता/Appellant

                                     VERSUS
                                      बनाम
CPIO: Puducherry Road
Transport Corporation Ltd.-                              ... ितवादीगण/Respondents
(UT of Puducherry),
Puducherry

Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:

RTI : 30.07.2024              FA     : 23.09.2024           SA     : 30.07.2024

CPIO : 23.08.2024             FAO : 09.12.2024              Hearing : 19.03.2026


Date of Decision: 24.03.2026
                                        CORAM:
                                   Hon'ble Commissioner
                                       Shri P R Ramesh
                                       ORDER

1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 30.07.2024 seeking information on the following points:

1. F.no.166/PRTC/RTI/2021/662 dt 08.11.2021 as per the RTI act 2005 the furnished information has stated that in tract no: 155A, PY01CD1831, 155B, PY01CD1830. The stoppage was made due to major mechanical work, electrical work and old dues pending. As above, I need the relevant information to their buses trip details and the information regarding any pending amount and sanction amount to Vista Driveline Pvt. Ltd., Chennai.

CIC/UTPON/A/2024/140022

2. As per the furnished information F.no.14/PRTC/RTI/2024/283 dt 15.06.2024 the details regarding 4 numbers of watchman post has been assigned under your office section.

3. Mr.B.Kalaiarasu as the ticket checker (Employee ID: 1271) while his duty where at Pondicherry to Bangalore Thiruvannamalai Bypass road, the bus No.PY01BV5823 was checked by him. The PRTC driver Mr.Neethinathan where on the duty at the time some alcohol bottle was recovered during inspection. In this regard I need details of the recovered alcohol bottles as now.

4. Route no: 5A, 10A, 14A, 15A, 16A, 16B, 22A, 24A, 25A, 27A, 27B, 45A and mini bus no: 33A, 35A, 38A, 41A. Furnish the details of permit and time list as per the original permit.

5. Furnish the details of N.Arulmani (Employee No: 5773) where he sought the information for his letter dated 25-04-2024 to the General Manager of PRTC.

6. My request questions was supposed to be sought by either Parliament or Assembly of State Government which can be denie?

2. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 23.08.2024 and the same is reproduced as under:-

1. The buses PY01CD1831 and PY01CD1830 has been moving. But the expenses of repair cannot be furnished

2. The employees have been assigned as per the required office work

3. Cannot furnish the checking details

4. Cannot furnish the time list and permit details

5. Your sought information has not in detailing. So we could not furnish the details Page 2 of 6 CIC/UTPON/A/2024/140022

3. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 23.09.2024 alleging that the information provided was incomplete, false and misleading. The FAA vide order dated 09.12.2024 observed as under :-

3. However, the First Appellate Authority has verified the records furnished to the applicant by PIO and concluded that the reply vide No.22/PRTC/RTI/2024/460, dt.23.08.2024 furnished to the applicant is found to be correct. The PIO has furnished information within stipulated time. Therefore, the appeal is disposed of accordingly.

4. Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 30.07.2024 Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:

Appellant: Not present Respondent: Shri M Bhaskar, GM(Admin) - participated in the hearing through video- conference.

5. The Respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that relevant information as available in their records has been duly provided to the Appellant. A written submission dated 18.03.2026 has bene received from the CPIO and same has been taken on record for perusal. The relevant extract whereof is as under:

It is submitted that initially Thiru.N.Arulmani, Driver(Contract) has submitted Form-1 dated 30.07.2024 and sought for information to the PIO, PRTC, PONDICHERRY incidently the PIO has initiated action & furnished replies on 23.08.2024 vide No.22/PRTC/RTI/2024/460. The applicant not satisfied about the replies furnished by the PIO has filed Appeal Petition with the Appellate Authority on 23.09.2024. Infact the Appellate Authority has also furnished replies to the petitioner on10.10.2024 vide no.10/2024/632. Now, the applicant Thiru.N.Arulmani, Driver(contract) has filed Appeal with the Page 3 of 6 CIC/UTPON/A/2024/140022 Hon'ble Information Commissioiner, New Delhi. Apparently after examining his petition a revised reply has been sent to the above petitioner. A copy of the same is also enclosed herewith for kind perusal of Hon'ble Information Commissioner, New Delhi.

Submitted to the Hon'ble Information Commissioner, CIC, New Delhi, for kind information.

6. A reply dated 18.03.2026 has been furnished to the Appellant. The relevant extract whereof is as under:

"..Question No. 1 & 4.

The information sought for relating to buses. No.PY01-CD-1831 & PY01-CD-1830 could not be furnished as per section 8.(1) (d) of RTI-Act 2005 since the information including commercial confidence, Trade Secrets or intellectual property the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of a third party unless Competent Authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants. In the instant case, the Competent Authority is satisfied that there is no public interest is involved

2. The details of engagement of 4 Watchman are furnished herewith:

1. C.Elumalai, RTO Section, 2.V.Prabath & 3. T.Ganesan, Despatch Section, 4. M.Muniyan, Office of the General Manager(Admn).

when 3. The information sought for about the confiscation of liquor bottles, Thiru.B.Kalairasu, Checking Inspector was discharging duty in the bus PY01-BV-5823 plying between Pondicherry Bengalore could not be furnished as per section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act, 2005 as the information the disclosure of which would impede the process of investigation and the departmental / Judicial Action.

CIC/UTPON/A/2024/140022

5. The letter dt.25.04.2024 has misplaced due to moving the files and records for Court case purpose in connection with the applicant Thiru.N.Arulmani, Driver(Contract)..."

Decision:

7. Keeping in view the facts of the case and the submissions made during hearing, the Commission is of the view that an appropriate response as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 has been provided by the Respondent. Commission notes that 'information' as defined in the section 2(f) of the Act, only refers to such material as is already available in the records of the public authority. Furthermore, the RTI Act, 2005 does not cast an obligation upon the public authority, to create or collate such non-

available information and then furnish it to an applicant. Hence, no further intervention of the Commission is required in the instant matter.

Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.

Sd/-

(P R Ramesh) (पी. आर. रमेश) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy Vivek Agarwal (िववेक अ वाल) Dy. Registrar (उप पंजीयक) 011-26107048 Addresses of the parties:

1 The CPIO Puducherry Road Transport Corporation Ltd.-(UT of Puducherry), No.-4, Behind Bus Stand, Raja Nagar, Ayyanar Koil Street, Orleanpet, Puducherry-605005.

CIC/UTPON/A/2024/140022 2 N Arulmani Page 6 of 6 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-

Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)