Central Information Commission
Saidur Rahman vs Northern Railway Firozpur on 20 February, 2020
Author: Neeraj Kumar Gupta
Bench: Neeraj Kumar Gupta
के न्द्रीयसूचनाआयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबागंगनाथमागग,मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नईदिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
नितीयअपीलसंख्या / Second Appeal No. CIC/NRALF/A/2018/138789
Saidur Rahman ... अपीलकताग/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO, M/O. Railways, Northern ...प्रनतवािीगण /Respondent
Railway, Ferozpur, Punjab.
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:
RTI : 23-11-2017 FA : 08-02-2018 SA : 15-06-2018
CPIO : 18-01-2018,
FAO : Not on Record Hearing : 17-02-2020
14-02-2020
ORDER
1. The appellant filed an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), M/o Railways, Northern Railway, Ferozepur, Punjab seeking information on six points pertaining to DoPT circular no. 10/1/2013-IR dated 06.10.2015, including, inter-alia;
"1. Certified copy of purchase details of the cash safe boxes of all the stations under commercial branch of Ferozepur division viz. name and address of the manufacturing company, no. of keys given by the company and records related to purchase including guarantee/warranty, Page 1 of 6
2. Certified copy of HOER Rules (Hours of Employment and Period of Rest Rules), 2005 relating to working hours of the coaching supervisors of all grades,
3. Duty list of coaching supervisors of all grades, etc."
2. The CPIO provided a reply vide letter dated 18.01.2018. The appellant filed the first appeal dated 08.02.2018 which was not disposed of by the first appellate authority. Thereafter, he filed a second appeal u/Section 19(3) of the RTI Act before the Commission requesting to take appropriate legal action against the CPIO u/Section 20 of the RTI Act and also to direct him to provide the sought for information.
Hearing:
3. The appellant, Shri Saidur Rahman, and the respondent, Shri Satbir Singh, ADMM, Shri Jai Singh, DPO and CPIO, and Shri Virender Prasad Bhatt, ACM, M/o Railways, Northern Railway, Ferozepur, Punjab attended the hearing through video conferencing. The written submissions are taken on record.
4. The appellant submitted that vide his RTI application dated 23.11.2017, he sought information on six points. The APIO, vide letter dated 18.01.2018, malafidely denied information on point no. 1 of the RTI application under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, 2005 treating the same as third party information. The appellant further submitted that vide point no. 1 of the RTI application, he has sought certified copies of purchase details of the cash safe boxes of all the stations under commercial branch of Ferozepur division. Such information does not pertain to third party and should be provided to him. He further apprised the Commission that with respect to the information sought vide point nos. 2, 4 and 5 of the RTI application, the APIO, vide the above noted letter forwarded the RTI application to Personnel department in order to provide the requisite information. However, no reply has been received from the Personnel department till date. With respect to the Page 2 of 6 APIO's reply on point no. 3, the appellant furthermore submitted that the APIO has sought an amount of Rs. 64/- in order to furnish a copy of the duty list of Coaching Supervisor to the appellant. The appellant submitted that since the APIO has not replied within the stipulated period of 30 days as per the RTI Act, the said information should be provided to him free of cost. He requested the Commission to direct the respondent to provide complete and correct information sought for.
5. The respondent submitted that the appellant vide point no. 1 of his RTI application has sought name and address of the manufacturing company, no. of keys given by the company and records related to purchase including guarantee/warranty. Such information, being third party, was denied to the appellant under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act vide letter dated 18.01.2018. In response to a query, the respondent submitted that the said information is not available with the respondent in the format in which it is sought by the appellant and will need compilation.
6. The respondent further submitted that the RTI application was received in their office on 22.12.2017, and an appropriate reply was provided by the respondent on 18.01.2018 i.e. well within the stipulated period of 30 days. The respondent, Personnel department, Ferozepur division submitted that an appropriate reply with respect to the information sought vide point no. 2 has been provided to the appellant vide letter dated 14.02.2020. In response to a query, the respondent admitted that no reply on point nos. 4 and 5 has been provided to the appellant till date.
7. The appellant contented that even though the APOI's reply is dated 18.01.2018, the details of the registered post show that the said reply was sent on 17.02.2018, thus, making it available to the appellant much beyond the stipulated period. The appellant also furnished documentary proof of the same.
Page 3 of 6Decision:
8. The Commission, after hearing the submissions of both the parties and perusing the records, observes that vide point no. 1 of the RTI application in question, the appellant has sought purchase details of the cash safe boxes of all the stations under commercial branch of Ferozepur division viz. name and address of the manufacturing company, no. of keys given by the company and records related to purchase including guarantee/warranty. Such records are in the nature of commercial confidence. The information relating to the notices of tender, the allotment of tender, the highest and lowest bidders are generally made available in public domain by the authorities, and thus, do not constitute third party information. However, purchase details of the cash safe boxes, name and address of the manufacturing company, no. of keys given by the company etc. are held in commercial confidence, the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of the third party concerned and would cause an unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the third party. The Commission, further, observes that the information sought vide point no. 1 is not readily available with the respondent.
The appellant is seeking purchase details, and the RTI Act nowhere requires the public authorities to maintain the said details in a centralized way. Further, the CPIO cannot be expected to compile the information and thus, disproportionately divert the resources of the respondent organization. The Commission, therefore, finds no infirmity in the CPIO's reply on point no. 1 of the RTI application.
9. The Commission further observes that as per the appellant, even though the RTI application was replied within 30 days, as claimed by the respondent, the same was dispatched almost after two months from the date of receipt of the application by the respondent. The Commission, giving the benefit of doubt to the appellant, directs the respondent to provide the 32 pages of the duty list of Coaching Supervisor free of cost to the appellant.
Page 4 of 610. The Commission also observes that no reply with respect to the information sought by the appellant vide point nos. 4 and 5 of the RTI application has not been provided by the respondent till date. Further, with respect to the information sought vide point no. 2, a reply dated 14.02.2020 has been provided by the respondent i.e. after a lapse of two years from the date of transfer of the RTI application to the personnel department. It is expected that the CPIO on receipt of a request shall as expeditiously as possible furnish an appropriate response to the applicant. In this case, the CPIO did not discharge his responsibility properly. A penalty of Rs. 1,000/- is therefore imposed on Shri Jai Singh, CPIO, Personnel Department, M/o Railways, Northern Railway, Ferozepur, Punjab u/s 20(1) of the RTI Act for contravening the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005. The amount of Rs. 1,000/- shall be deducted by the Public Authority from his salary by way of demand draft drawn in favour of "PAO, CAT", New Delhi and the demand draft should be forwarded to the Deputy Registrar (CR-II), email: [email protected], Room no. 106, First Floor, Central Information Commission, Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka, New Delhi - 110067. This demand draft of Rs. 1,000/- shall reach the Commission within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
11. The Commission further directs the CPIO, Personnel Department to furnish an appropriate reply to the appellant with respect to the information sought vide point nos. 4 and 5 of the RTI application.
12. The above directions of the Commission shall be complied with, within a period of 15 days from the receipt of a copy of this order under intimation to the Commission.
13. With the above observations, the appeal is disposed of.
14. Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
Neeraj Kumar Gupta (नीरजकु मारगुप्ता) Information Commissioner (सूचनाआयुक्त) दिनांक / Date:-17-02-2020 Page 5 of 6 Authenticated true copy (अनिप्रमानणतसत्यानपतप्रनत) S. C. Sharma (एस. सी. शमाग), Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक), (011-26105682) Addresses of the parties:
1. The CPIO, M/O. Railways, Sr. DMM & Nodal PIO, Northern Railway, RTI Cell, DRM's Office, Ferozepur Divn., Ferozepur, Punjab-152001.
2. Mr. Saidur Rahman Page 6 of 6