Central Information Commission
Sanjay Poddar vs Ministry Of Railways (Railway Board) on 30 October, 2025
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
File No: CIC/MORLY/A/2024/138547
Sanjay Poddar .....अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
PIO,
Railway Board, Rail Bhawan,
New Delhi - 110001 .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 27.10.2025
Date of Decision : 30.10.2025
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari
(Total number of 13 Second Appeals of the Appellant are listed today for
hearing before the Commission)
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 18.06.2024
CPIO replied on : 16.08.2024
First appeal filed on : 28.08.2024
First Appellate Authority's order : 10.10.2024
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 19.11.2024
Information sought:
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 18.06.2024 (offline) seeking the following information:
"I joined IRSME in the year 1996 through the 1994 Engineering Services Examination. I was compulsorily retired vide Rly Bd's order dated 03.12.2019. To defend my case in CAT Mumbai, I may kindly be furnished Page 1 of 8 with the following information under the backdrop mentioned in each Case
1) I was kept under sick list of the Byculla railway hospital vide the sick memo dt 07.08.2018 and continued to be under sick till 11.03.2019 when I was discharged vide MD/Byculla letter No BY/HE/Sick/SP dated 11.03.2019 addressed to PCMD/CSMT with copy of the letter marked to DRM(P) and PCME/CR. This letter was handed over to me in person on 01.04.2019 at my official residence by a staff of the PCME office under a covering letter No.M.PCME.CON dated 15.03.2019 from Secy. to PCME (Sri V S Prabhaker) who also marked this letter as a copy to DyCPO (Gaz) CSMT. In connection with above narration I would like myself to be furnished with the following information. a) The remark(s) passed by each authority i.e. i) DRM(P) i)PCME CSMT ii) DYCPO (Gaz) CSMT
iv)PCMD CSMT, who were in receipt of the MD/Byculla's letter, through their file noting(s) or through any other mean(s). Also provide certified copy of the discharge certificate dated 11.03.2019 as sent by MD/Byculla railway hospital to the PCME along with the letter dated 11.03.2019.
2) In the CAT/BB order No dated 17.12.2018 delivered on the OA No 762/2018 the speaking order dated 15.01.2019 was passed by the PCME Sri. Manoj Joshi.i). In this connection kindly arrange to provide the remark(s) passed by both the respondents in the case i.e. the GM/CR Sri D.K.Sharma and the SPO(Gaz/legal)/General Manager(P) through file noting(s) in consultation with whom, speaking order was passed by the PCME/CR (ii)Note of approval by GM/CR of the draft speaking order before being finally endorsed by the PCME for providing to the applicant (Sanjay Podder) in response to the Hon'able Tribunal order may also be furnished.
3) For the purpose of weeding out the inefficient, ineffective, corrupt or doubtful integrity employees from the railway employment and to keep it trim, honest and efficient, the provision of rule No 1802(2) and 1803(a) of IREC Vol(ii) have been used to compulsory retire a employee in a bid to strengthen the administration. Kindly arrange to provide a copy of Schedule of power (For short SOP) under which GM/CR is authorized to constitute a committee for the said purpose consisting of the PCPO and the PCME for reviewing the performance of a class I gazetted officer.
ii)Also in exercise of which rule PCME/CR and PCPO/CR can recommend to GM/CR to compulsory retire or retain a class I & class II gazetted officer from the railway service. Copy of the rule may be provided.Page 2 of 8
4) My letter dated 10.10.2019 addressed to PCME/CR a copy of which is enclosed may be taken as reference to provide the information as to what action was taken by the PCME/CR on the said letter. In this, all noting exchange between the PCME, PCPO and the GM/CR may kindly be furnished.
5) Copy of the letter that dictates i) The policy for consideration of the request transfer of a gazetted employee by the competent authority and also ii) the policy which enable or guide a competent authority to cancel a transfer order of a class I gazetted employee within the zonal railway (Central Railway) ii) An exhaustive list of the grounds considered for the above purpose may also be provided.
6) No of staff cases on Central Railway recommended for cut in pension to Railway Board to affect penalty, on issuance of SF-5 (Major penalty charge. sheet) by filling the UPSC form in the year 2018, 2019, 2020.
7) Noting pages of the files on which approval given by the competent authority to utilize the WMDA fund for a purpose other than for what it is meant.
8) Number of days of detention in the year 2017 to Train No KMPS/ Container/Ld at NGN station of BSL for detection of the centre Sill crack in the BLL wagons. Under whose initiative train was allowed to move.
Kindly arrange to provide the concern noting page(s).
9) For the year 2017-18, how many cases were reported where delay in offering TS(technical scrutiny) took place by more than three working days, both for TC (tender committee)as well as non TC cases and for such reported cases which is considered to be viewed very seriously i) what action was taken against such officials responsible for the delays by the then PCME Sri K.P.Somkuwar,i.e., how the erring officials were acted upon by the then PCME/CR ii) Was confidential letter issued to all the concerned or selectively few chosen for the purpose. iii) Name of the officials issued with such confidential letters may also kindly be furnished?
10) Due to implementation of JPO (joint procedure order) on damages to wagon at the sidings where loading, unloading takes place, the damages to the wagons must have been totally curbed on central railway or reduced drastically. Kindly enumerate the total wagon damage charges recovered from various parties after the implementation of the JPO and Page 3 of 8 also the damage charges recovered since 01.08.2018 till date and this figure (amount) should be supported by suitable documents)
11) Please refer to the letter No:C 424/M&S/Own wagon policy(1) dated 31.10.2017 addressed to all the CMEs & CFTMs of the zonal Railways, by Sri H Basak, Dy Chief Commercial Manager/FM& claims with regard to request for verification and certification of 50 BTPN Wagons under OYW Scheme. Kindly arrange to furnish the action taken on this letter by the then PCME/CR and CRSE(FR) for resolving the issue ii) Under this scheme, current status on releaze of the payment by Central Railways to the oil companies may also be furnished and if the payment is on conditional basis, the condition so laid down may be made available by providing the copy of the file noting(s).
12) Kindly refer to the letter No.CRX/CB/NHRC-72/2017-18 dt 20.04.2018 addressed to FA&CAO(X)/CSMT on the subject ""NHRC Notice regarding monetary relief to .....at MTN railway station. What were those compelling circumstances which forced the administration to allow the matter to be dealt by the then Secy to PCME Sanjay Podder rather than the DyCME (Workshop)/CR who was to deal the matter. Kindly arrange to furnish the said letter and the subsequent letter written by DyCME (Workshop) thereafter.
13) For the purpose of breaking the monopoly and to introduce competition with an over all objective to bring down the price of an item effort should be made by the railways to develop new vendors. For one such item "Torsion spring for ALT of BLC wagon M/S HOLLAND and CO LTD part No68858 or similar" what efforts have been made by Central Railway? i) All correspondence related to above may be furnished along with the unit cost of the item at which it has been purchased in the recent past on the Indian Railways. ii) Copy of the purchase order may be furnished.
14) My application dated 02.08.2018(copy enclosed) addressed to the PCME/CR was a request letter meant for cancellation of my transfer order dated 24.07.2018 (copy enclosed). Action taken report (remarks passed etc) on the said application by the PCME/CR may kindly be furnished.
15) A letter dated 15.01.2019 (copy enclosed) followed from the PCME/CR as a reasoned reply(speaking order) against a judgment dated 17.12.2018 in the OA No 762/2018 filed in CAT Mumbai. Please peruse Page 4 of 8 the Para No 2 of the letter(speaking order) and provide me the necessary calculation sheet wherein the figure of 18 (eighteen) years of my stay at Mumbai had been arrived at otherwise you can provide me a copy of the Personal Data record which depicts or substantiate the figure of 18 years.
16) For the letter/note No.M.79.C&W. Policy dated 14.09.2017 enclosed, what is the compliance status by RDSO? Have all issues raised in the letter addressed by (RDSO) it? If so copies of the reply letters received may be provided.
17) Designation of the Public authority on Central and the Western Railway who is responsible for record keeping of the number of various posts surrendered on both the zones.
18) Provide me a copy of the extant provision/rules being followed on Indian Railways for extension of probation period of a group A officer and the corresponding rules that were followed during the decade 1991 to 2000.
19) Please furnish to me, for the IRSME 94 batch, copies of all the notifications (containing name of the officers promoted) issued for promotion to JAG,SG, NFSAG, SAG, NFHAG & HAG on the Indian Railways.
20) Name of the division on western railway which received the fuel efficiency shield for the calendar year 2000 & 2001
21) A copy of the guidelines being followed on Central Railway for the purpose of assessing the extent of specified disability in a person included under the Rights of person with Disabilities Act, 2016(49 of 2016)."
2. The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 16.08.2024 stating as under:
"Reply to the item No. (19) (Part) of your RTI application is enclosed. Information sought is not held by this CPIO, in the form it is requested. Further, compilation of the requested information will disproportionately divert the resources of public authority, under Section 7(9) of RTI Act. However, it is informed that all the Posting/ promotion orders of Railway officers issued by Railway Board are uploaded on website official Page 5 of 8 (https://indianrailways.gov.in/railwayboard/view_section.jsp?lang=0&id =0,5,1418,1448) which can be referred for information."
3. Being dissatisfied, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 28.08.2024. The FAA vide its order dated 10.10.2024, held as under:
"After going through the RTI request and First appeal, I find that CPIO-76 has already replied to item No.19 of your RTI application vide letter of even number dated 16.08.2024, within time limit. Compiling promotion orders of all officers of 1994 IRSME batch to grades of JAG, SG, NFSAG, SAG, NFHAG & HAG is a humongous task and would disproportionately divert the resources of public authority, under Section 7(9) of RTI Act. I find that the fact of all the promotion/transfer/posting orders being availabie on official (https://indianrailways.gov.in/railwayboard/view_section.jsp?lang=0&id =0,5,1418,1448) been informed in the response of CPIO-76. website has It may kindly be appreciated that a Public Authority is required to supply the, information in the form as held by the Public Authority and hence, no further intervention is called for and the Appeal preferred in the aforesaid matter is hereby disposed of, accordingly."
4. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Present through Video-Conference.
Respondents: Shri D D Radola, Under Secretary present in person.
Shri K Sudarshan, Dy. FA & CAO & PIO, Central Railway, Shri Mishal, Dy. CME (Planning) & PIO, Dr. Sangeeta Mehra, ECMB & CPIO, Central Railway, Shri Abhinandan Aggarwal, Dy. CME (Planning) & CPIO, Central Railway and Shri Ajay Raj, APO & APIO, all present through Video-Conference.
5. Proof of having served a copy of Second Appeal on Respondents while filing the same in CIC on 19.11.2024 is not available on record. Respondents confirm non-service.
6. Written submissions of the Respondent are taken on record.
Page 6 of 87. The Appellant, during the hearing, reiterated the contents of his RTI application and instant appeal and submitted that he restricts his Second Appeal only on point No. 19. He requested the Commission that direction of disclosure of correct information should be given to the Respondent on point No. 19 of the RTI application.
8. The Respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that complete point-wise reply/information, as per the documents available on record has been provided to the Appellant.
9. Upon being queried by the Commission, the Respondent submitted that the Cadre Controlling authority is Board Members and the DPC is headed by CRB. He further submitted that the information sought on point No. 19 of the RTI application is already available in public domain from the year 2014 onwards. The Appellant had sought information from the year 1994 which will require going through the physical records for a period of 20 years till 2014.
10. The Appellant resubmitted that there were less than seven officers in the 1994 batch.
Decision:
11. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, and perusal of the records, observes that the Appellant in his Second Appeal is aggrieved that no information was provided to him by the Respondent on point No. 19 of the RTI application.
12. The Commission observes that the reply given by the Respondent on point No. 19 of the RTI application is incomplete, vague and misleading. Complete and correct information has not been provided to the Appellant.
13. In view of the above observations and submissions made during the hearing, the Commission directs the Respondent to re-examine point No. 19 of the RTI application dated 18.06.2024 of the Appellant and provide revised reply/information sought in the above-mentioned RTI application to the Appellant, along with supporting documents, if any, Page 7 of 8 failing which to show-cause within this period as to why maximum penalty should not be imposed under the RTI Act.
14. The aforesaid direction shall be complied with by the PIO within two weeks from the date of receipt of this order.
15. The FAA is directed to ensure compliance of this order.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Vinod Kumar Tiwari (िवनोद कुमार ितवारी) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स!ािपत ित) (S. Anantharaman) Dy. Registrar 011- 26181927 Date Copy To:
The FAA, Railway Board, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi - 110001 Page 8 of 8 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)