Central Information Commission
Mr.Harpal Singh Rana vs Ministry Of Urban Development on 31 January, 2013
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
CLUB BUILDING (NEAR POST OFFICE)
OLD JNU CAMPUS, NEW DELHI110067
TEL.: 01126179548
Decision No.CIC/DS/A/2011/003454/VS/01982
Appeal No. CIC/DS/A/2011/003454/VS
Dated: 31.1.2013
Appellant: Shri Harpal Singh Rana,
A1, V&PO Kadipur,
Delhi110036
Respondent: Public Information Officer,
Delhi Metro Rail Corporation,
Metro Bhawan, Barakhamba Rd.,
New Delhi110001
Date of Hearing 31.1.2013
ORDER
RTI application:
1. The appellant filed an RTI application on 22.2.2011 with the PIO, O/o Chief Minister, Delhi, asking for information, in Hindi, about disturbance in metro service. The addressee PIO forwarded it to PIO, DMRC on 25.2.2011 who, in turn, forwarded it to the concerned PIO on 8.3.2011. In all, information was sought on 15 points. The PIO responded pointwise on 13.4.2011.
2. Not satisfied with the reply of the PIO, the appellant filed an appeal on 14.5.2011 with the first appellate authority (FAA). The FAA provided additional information on 21.6.2011. The appellant approached the Commission on 24.9.2011 in second appeal.
Hearing
3. The respondent was present at the hearing, who stated that the RTI application covered a wide canvas of information points which the respondent had sought to address.
The respondent stated that some parts of the information were such where it was not feasible to collate the information in the format given by the appellant.
4. The respondent further stated that the appellant was seeking information about the datewise dislocation of metro service with full details right from the metro's inception in 2002 uptil now. The respondent explained that disruption in the metro service could happen on so many counts, i.e., overcrowding or electricity tripping or signal failure, etc.. The respondent questioned how can it be possible to collate all this information and that this is what has been conveyed to the appellant in the response.
5. It is clear that collection of the abovestated information would involve disproportionate use of the public authority's resources without adequate purpose.
6. The approach taken by the respondent is in line with the RTI Act and no further intervention of the Commission is required.
7. The appellant did not participate in the hearing.
Decision
8. Action at the level of the Commission is not needed in the matter.
Appeal is disposed off. Copy of this decision be given free of cost to both the parties.
(Vijai Sharma) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy (V.K. Sharma) Designated Officer