Central Information Commission
Vinod Kumar Tyagi vs Railway Board on 19 August, 2020
CIC/RAILB/A/2018/155539
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/2018/155539
In the matter of:
Vinod Kumar Tyagi ... अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO ,
Cum Principal Chief Security
Commissioner,
Railway Protection Force Camp,
Headquarters, 6/BN, ... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Daya Basti, Delhi - 110 035.
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:
RTI : 14.05.2018 FA : 12.07.2018 SA : 10.09.2018
CPIO : 07.06.2018 &
FAO : 05.08.2020 Hearing : 11.08.2020
30.08.2018
The following were present:
Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Tyagi, heard over the phone.
Respondent: Shri Alok Kumar, DIG-RPSF & CPIO, Railway Board, New Delhi,
heard over the phone.
Page 1 of 8
CIC/RAILB/A/2018/155539
ORDER
Information Sought:
The appellant filed an RTI application on 14.05.2018, seeking information on seven points including, inter-alia;
1) िन िल खत प ों पर वा. रे . सु. िव.ब. के कायालय के ारा ा कायवाही की गई है ?:
क) No. 14 BN/PF/IPF-V.KT/2017-1777 dated 15.09.2017, ख) No. 2016/Sec(ABE)/Comp/2/26 New Delhi dated 10.02.2017, ग) छठी वा. /ई/ गत िमिसल/िन.वी.के.टी./2016 - 894 dated 13.11.2016, घ) No. 6BN/E/Dep-06/2016-844 dated 31.10.2016, ङ) रे . सु.ब./ बी.सी.टी.सी / ो ित था रण/ 2016-207A dated 28.01.2016, च) छठी वा. /ई./ यि गत. िमिसल/ नी. वी. के . टी. /2016-910 िद. 19.11.2016.
छ) NO6BN/E/P.F./IPF-V.K.T. 2016-862 dt. 04.11.2016. ज) प ांक 2016/आई जी./ इं पे शन िद. 15 िसत बर 2016.
झ) An application addressed to the Sr. Comdt./6BN/RPSF/DBSI/DL/ Posted by me on 29.01.2018 at 14.12 hrs vide ED 660351589IN counter No./OP-Code.44.
2) व र समादे शक छठी वा. रे . सु . िव.ब. ारा महािनरी क / रे . सु. िव.ब. के कायालय को अ िसत िकये गए िन िल खत प ों पर ई कायवाही के बारे म जानकारी दे तथा इन प ों पर कुछ भी कायवाही न होने की दशा म इसका कारन सूिचत करे :
क) No. 6BN/C/PF/IPF-V.K.T./2014-94 dated 24.02.2014, ख) No. 6BN/C/PF/IPF-V.K.T./2014-96 dated 25.02.2014,
3) भारी स. स. / 14वी वा. रे . सु. िव.ब. के ारा महािनरी क/ रे . सु. िव.ब. को ेिषत िकये गए प no14BN/T&P/E-34/2017-1830 िदनाक 28.09.2017 के अनुसार ाथ के िव कोई भी DAR/Vigilance case नहीं दशाया गया है एवं उसके गृह-
समीप े हे तु तैनाती के िलए ुत आवदे न प को िसफा रश सिहत अ सर िकया जाने के दशा म भी DG/RPP's Directive32 जारी रहने की दशा म भी पाबता होते ए, उसके आवदे न प पर Board's Letter No. 2017/Sec/(ABE)/Comp/3/1 dated 19.01.2018 के अनुसार (No. Page 2 of 8 CIC/RAILB/A/2018/155539 14BN/HQs/PF/IPF-YKT/2018-266 dated 20.01.2018) िवचार न िकये जाने का ा कारण है ? कृपया इस बारे म ई कायवाही के बारे म (द ावेजों की स ित सिहत) जानकारी दे ,
4) महािनरी क/ रे . सु . ब./ रे लवे बोड नई िद ी के कायालय से जारी प -आदे श - िनदशवाली के अनुसार िकसी िनरी क/ रे . सु . िव.ब. / रे . सु. ब. के ी matuared थानां तरण िकये जाने के िलए मु. सु. आ. / रे . सु. िव.ब./ रे . सु . ब. कायालय के ारा माननीय महािनदे शक / रे . सु . ब./ रे . बो. की ीकृित िलए जाने का ावधान दशाया सु झाया गया है , मगर ाथ के थानां तरण आदे शांतगत (ऐ. बी. ई. कायालय / रे . बो. ारा ) जारी प ादे श स. 2017/Sec/(ABE)/comp/3/1 dated 10.02.2017 म उ ि या अमल म नही ं लाई गई है कृपया इसका कारण सू िचत कराये। ों ?
5) प ादे श no. 2017/Sec/(ABE)/Comp/3/1 dated 10.02.2017 के शीष भाग म विणत प no 6BN/CD/CoNF2/2017-18 dated 06.02.2016 की स ािपत छाया- ित दे ने का क करे ।
6) िद 14.04.2018 को का. राकेश कुमार /14BN /RPFS के मा म से ाथ को ा कराये गए Annual Performance Appraisal वा े अविध 01.04.2016 से 11.02.2018 (छाया ित सल ) के बारे म कृपया सू िचत करने का क करे की, क) Initiating officer Sh. Ajay Kr. Sharma AC/RPSF/6BN/DBSI विणत अविध म ाथ के साथ Ecoy म TKD तथा PMPE/Kashmirvalley म कब कब रहे है ? कृपया उनकी weekly diary एवं अ सं बिधत रकॉड की स ित , ाथ को उपल कराने का क करे ।
ख) उ अविध म ई. क. छठी वा. रे . सु. िव.ब. के, पामपोर क ीर घाटी म तैनाती के दौरान न ही तो कोई भी अिधकृत कंपनी इ े कंपनी के संचालन हे तु भे जा गया है तथा न ही ाथ को जून 2016 से फरवरी 2017 की अविध का दे य। अिधकृत या ा भ ा िदया गया है ों?
ग) उ A.P.A. के मां क 12 पर विणत displeasure notes का मु -आधार
ा है ? कृपया मवार ट: अवगत कराये ,
घ) उ अविध के दौरान (अ टूबर 2016 के थम स ाह म) ई. क. के ., PMPE म तैनाती हेतु movement के म म स. स. उ का या सहयोग/ योगदान रहा था ? या उ ह ने रे . बो. ारा जारी आदेश का पालन िकया है ?
Page 3 of 8CIC/RAILB/A/2018/155539 ङ) Movement के समय TKD to Delhi Railway Station एवं Udhampur to PMPE तक कंपनी को या या सरकारी वाहन उपल ध करवाए गए थे-Log-Books क स य ित - ितया उपल ध कराने का क करे ।
7) रे . सु. िव.ब. के कमां ड मु ालय (ए बी ई से न सिहत) म िपछले ल े अरसे से कायकर रहे बल सद ो को ASI से SI तथा SI से IPF के AdHoc पदों पर उ दे कर था रण करने के बाद पु न: रे . बो. म सं बध करके रखा जा रहा है इस संबध म कृपया जानकारी दे ने का क करे की क) मु ालयों म काय करने वाले उ. िन. को एडहॉक म िनरी क पद पर पदोनत करके थां तरण के बाद भी पुन: मु ालय / रे . सु. िव.ब. /ABE म सं बध करने म रे ल राज पर ित कुल िकतना यउ ेड तथा या ा भ ा दे ने म का रत होता है ?
ख) वष 2017 म िकतने व कौन कौन उ. िन. उ ि या के तहत िकस आदे श व करण के तहत लाभांिवत िकये गए है ? रकॉड की ित भे जे।
ग) उ ि या की वै धािनक अिनवायता ा है ?
घ) ाउ करण पर िकया गया खच, एक आरं शी के वेतन के बराबर एवं
रे ल राज पर अनावशयक खच नही ं है ?
The CPIO in his reply dated 30.08.2018 furnished the available information on point 1(क), 1(झ), 7(क) and 7(ख) of RTI application. On point no. 1(ख) of RTI application, CPIO stated that the letter was not issued by the Railway Board. On point no. 1(ग) to 1(ज) and 2(क) & 2(ख) of RTI application, it was mentioned by the CPIO that the information sought was not traceable. On point no. 3, 4, 6 (ख) to 6(घ) and 7 (ग)-7(घ) of RTI application, CPIO stated that the information sought does not fall under the term "information" as defined u/s. 2(f) of the RTI Act. On point no. 5, information was denied by CPIO u/s. 8(1)(h) of the Act and on point no. 6(ड) of RTI application, CPIO denied the information u/s. 8(1)(g) of the Act, however, he furnished the copy of Bd L.no.2011/Sec. (Crime)/41/RTI/02 dated 08.09.2011.
Page 4 of 8CIC/RAILB/A/2018/155539 Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed first appeal on 12.07.2018. The FAA vide its order dated 05.08.2020 furnished information on point no. 1(ग) of RTI application and on point no. 3 - 7 of the RTI application upheld the reply of CPIO.
Grounds for Second Appeal:
The appellant filed second appeal u/s 19 of the Act on the ground of non receipt of information by the respondent. He requested the Commission to direct the CPIO to provide the information sought for.
Submissions made by Appellant and Respondent during Hearing:
The Appellant reiterated the content of his RTI application and submitted that he received the reply of CPIO on 18.09.2018 i.e. after filing of second appeal before the Commission. He further submitted that his matter of grievance could not be settled due to non- furnishing of sought information by the CPIO. The appellant requested the Commission to direct the CPIO to provide the information sought. Per contra, the respondent submitted available information on every point of RTI application was furnished to the appellant as per RTI provision. The respondent further submitted that the appellant is seeking redressal of his grievances. However, RTI Act is not the proper law for redressal of grievances and there are other appropriate fora for resolving such matters. The respondent at the end, offered an opportunity to the appellant to visit the office for redressal of his grievance.
A written submission dated 08.08.2020, filed by the appellant, was taken on record.Page 5 of 8
CIC/RAILB/A/2018/155539 A written submission dated 05.08.2020, filed by Shri Ashok Kumar, DIG/ RSPF, Railway Board, was taken on record.
Decision:
The Commission after hearing the submissions of both the parties and perusal of record observes that the available information was given to the appellant by CPIO vide letter dated 07.06.2018 and FAA vide its order dated 05.08.2020. The Commission also accepts the stand of the respondent that the RTI Act is not the proper law for redressal of grievances and that there are other appropriate fora for resolving such matters. As regards point nos. 1(ख) - 1(ज), 2(क )-2(ख ) of the RTI application, the Commission, directs the respondent to file an affidavit with the Commission deposing that no record relating to information sought is available with them, hence, no information can be provided to the appellant. A copy of the affidavit shall also be provided to the appellant. The above directions of the Commission shall be complied with, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
The Commission, notes that the appellant has filed this RTI application seeking information on 7 points with sub-points on various issues. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in its decision in Central Board of Secondary Education and another vs. Aditya Bandopadhyay and Others, (2011) 8 SCC497 has held that, "The Act should not be allowed to be misused or abused, to become a tool to obstruct the national development and integration, or to destroy the peace, tranquility and harmony among its citizens. Nor should it be converted into a tool of oppression or intimidation of honest officials striving to do their duty. The nation does not want a scenario where 75% of the staff of public authorities spends 75% of their time in collecting and furnishing information Page 6 of 8 CIC/RAILB/A/2018/155539 to applicants instead of discharging their regular duties. The threat of penalties under the RTI Act and the pressure of the authorities under the RTI Act should not lead to employees of a public authorities prioritizing 'information furnishing', at the cost of their normal and regular duties." The Commission considering the above ratio, counsels the appellant to be more careful in future while filing the RTI applications thus, preventing the misuse of the privilege afforded by the RTI Act. Any attempt, therefore, that seeks to promote selfish ends at the cost of public good has to be subjected to the strictest scrutiny not only in terms of the provisions of the RTI Act but also in terms of its purpose, as enshrined in its preamble.
With the above observations, the appeal is disposed of. Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
The appeal, hereby, stands disposed of.
Amita Pandove (अिमता पांडव) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) दनांक / Date 11.08.2020 Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स यािपत ित) B. S. Kasana (बी. एस. कसाना) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26105027 Page 7 of 8 CIC/RAILB/A/2018/155539 Addresses of the parties:
1. The First Appellate Authority (FAA) Railway Protection Force Camp, Headquarters 6/BN, Dayabasti Delhi - 110 035
2. The Central Public Information Officer Cum Principal Chief Security Commissioner, Railway Protection Force Camp, Headquarters 6/BN, Dayabasti Delhi - 110 035
3. Mr. Vinod Kumar Tyagi Page 8 of 8