Central Information Commission
Abdul Waheed vs Ministry Of Railways on 2 November, 2018
क य सूचना आयोग
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
बाबा गंगानाथ माग
Baba Gangnath Marg,
मु नरका, नई द ल -110067
Munirka, New Delhi-110067
File No.: CIC/MORLY/A/2017/185157
In the matter of:
Abdul Waheed
...Appellant
VS
Sr.DPO/PIO
South Central Railway,
Secunderabad Division, DRM's Office,
Personnel Branch, Sanchalan Bhavan,
Secunderabad, Telangana- 500071. ...Respondent
Dates
RTI application : 29.08.2016
CPIO reply : Not on Record
First Appeal : 01.10.2016
FAA Order : Not on Record
Second Appeal : 02.11.2016
Date of hearing : 26.02.2018, 15.10.2018
Facts:
The appellant vide RTI application dated 29.08.2016 sought information regarding the present status of his case for granting compassionate allowance. Details of the document(s), if any, which need to be submitted still by the appellant in his case were also asked in the said RTI application. The CPIO's reply and the First Appellate Authority (FAA)'s order, if any, were not on record. Aggrieved with the non-supply of the desired information from the respondent authority, the appellant filed a second appeal under the provision of Section 19 of the RTI Act before the Central Information Commission on 02.11.2016.
Grounds for Second Appeal The CPIO did not provide the desired information.
1
Order
Appellant : Present
Respondent : Shri S. Naik,
Divisional Personnel Officer cum APIO,
South Central Railway
During the hearing, the respondent APIO submitted that they had provided the requisite reply vide their letter dated 20.06.2017. The reply furnished to the appellant is just and proper and hence the case might be dismissed. Since the same was not available in the case record, the respondent PIO was asked to read the same over the VC facility. He was intimated to send a copy of the same to the Commission through e-mail for record.
On perusal of the case record, it was seen that the reply provided was in connection with some other RTI application and no reply was provided in this case. A show cause notice needs to be issued to the then PIO for not providing the requisite reply to the appellant so far in the present case.
In view of the above, a Show Cause notice is issued to the then PIO u/s 20 of the RTI Act to explain the following:-
Why no reply was provided to the appellant in the present case under the provision of the RTI Act.
The explanation to the above stated Show Cause Notice is to be submitted to the Commission by the respondent CPIO/PIO within 15 days of the receipt of this order. The present CPIO is also to submit a report to the Commission indicating the name, address, mobile no., present place of posting and designation of the then CPIO working at the relevant post at the relevant period. The present respondent CPIO is to serve a copy of this order to the then respondent CPIO under intimation to the Commission. On receipt of the explanation to the said Show Cause notice, further action as deemed appropriate will be taken.2
The then respondent CPIO should note that in the event of non- submission of the requisite explanation within the time period stipulated above, the Commission has the liberty to take the required decision ex-parte against the respondent CPIO.
Be that as it may, since no desired information was provided to the appellant in the present case, the present respondent CPIO is directed to provide point wise reply complete in all respects to the appellant as available on record in the form of certified true copies of the documents sought e.g. note sheet, letter, correspondence, e-mail etc.(legible copies), free of charge u/s 7(6) of the RTI Act within 15 days of the receipt of the order. For this purpose, the concerned CPIO/PIO, can take assistance of any other office/department u/s 5(4) of the RTI Act.
The present respondent CPIO is further directed to send a report containing the copy of the revised reply and the date of despatch of the same to the RTI appellant within 07 days thereafter to the Commission for record.
With the above direction, the appeal is disposed of.
Copies of the order be sent to the concerned parties free of cost.
Adjunct Order : 15.10.2018 Respondent : Present, Shri D. Subramanyam
Submission of the respondent authority, Sh. D Subrahmanyam, Dy. Chief Engineer/Con/NZB (The then Sr DEN (Coord):
1. The applicant had sought information regarding the status of his application for compassionate allowance through RTI on 01.02.2016. The information had been conveyed to him by ADEN/TM/Kazipet stating that the applicant's representation was not received by the ADEN/TM/Kazipet for disposal.
2. The applicant had made another representation through the RTI dated 29.08.2016 to the then Sr. DPO/SC/PIO which was routed to the then Sr. DEN/Co-ord/SC and APIO.3
3. The Sr. DEN/Co-ord/SC and APIO had immediately advised ADEN/TM/Kazipet on 20.09.2016 under whom the applicant had worked prior to his removal from service, to send the SR, LLR and DAR case file of the applicant for replying to the RTI query of the applicant. The SR and LLR are necessary documents for sanctioning compassionate allowance. As the employee was removed from service on 04.04.2006 and due to shifting of ADEN/TM/KZJ office to a new complex, the old files could not be traced. The ADEN/TM/KZJ had expressed his inability to trace necessary documents since the copies of documents sought for are 10 years old.
4. Sincere efforts were made for tracing files at the office of the Sr. DEN/Co-ord/SC and ADEN/TM/KZJ for addressing the grievance of the applicant. After several such efforts, the applicant was informed, vide letter dated 20.06.2017, expressing the inability of the respondent authority, to sanction him compassionate allowance without the requisite documents.
Decision:
Based on the above explanation, it was noted by the Commission that the then Sr DEN (Coord) was responsible for delay in providing final reply to the appellant from 20.09.2016 to 20.06.2017.
The Commission hereby imposes penalty of Rs. 10,000/- on Sh. D Subrahmanyam, Dy. Chief Engineer/Con/NZB who was the then Sr DEN (Coord) for causing delay in replying to the said RTI application. Accordingly, he is directed to pay a sum of Rs 10,000/- in 4 equal monthly instalments. The Chief Engineer, Secunderabad South Central Railway is directed to recover the amount of Rs 10,000/- from the salary payable to Sh. D Subrahmanyam and remit the same by way of demand draft drawn in favour of 'PAO CAT' New Delhi in 4 equal monthly instalments. The first instalment should reach the Commission by 20.12.2018 and the last instalment should reach by 20.03.2019.
The Demand Drafts should be sent to Deputy Registrar (CR-II), e-
4mail;[email protected] Room no. 106, First Floor, Central Information Commission, Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka, New Delhi-110067.
The registry of this bench is directed to send a copy of this order to the Chief Engineer, Secunderabad South Central Railway for compliance of this order.
The Chief Engineer, Secunderabad South Central Railway is directed to take action as per the above direction and submit an action taken report within 15 days from the receipt of this order.
A copy of this order be sent to the Chief Engineer, Secunderabad South Central Railway for information and appropriate action.
With the above order, the showcause proceeding is closed. Copies of the order be sent to the concerned parties free of cost.
अिमताभ भ टाचाय
Amitava Bhattacharyya (अिमताभ टाचाय)
Information Commissioner ( सूचना आयु )
Authenticated true copy
(अिभ मा णत स या पत ित)
Ajay Kumar Talapatra (अजय कुमार तलाप!)
Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक)
011- 26182594 / [email protected]
दनांक / Date
Copy to:
1.The Chief Engineer, South Central Railway, Office of Principal Chief Engineer, 5th floor, Rail Nilayam, Secunderabad.
2. Deputy Registrar (CR-II), e-mail;[email protected] Room no. 106, First Floor, Central Information Commission, Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka, New Delhi-110067 5