Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Mr. Sanjay Poddar vs M/O Railways, New Delhi on 19 February, 2010

             Central Information Commission
                                                                CIC/AD/A/2009/001708
                                                               Dated 19th February, 2010

Name of the Applicant                     :   MR. SANJAY PODDAR


Name of the Public Authority              :   M/O RAILWAYS, NEW DELHI

Background

1. The Applicant filed his RTI request on 31.03.09 with the CPIO, Rail Ministry, New Delhi asking whether his representation dated 12.03.08 bas been put up to the competent authority for consideration along with entire noting page in this regard and for any order passed by the competent authority in respect of this representation, besides miscellaneous information against 4 points. The PIO replied on 22.05.09 enclosing information provided by the Director, Railway Board wherein the Director stated that the Applicant had already been informed vide reply dated 10.04.09 that representation dated 12.03.08 has not been received in their office and that there is no change in the position as far as the reply goes. Being aggrieved with this reply, the Applicant filed his First Appeal on 29.05.09 seeking the information once again. On not receiving any reply, the Applicant filed his Second Appeal before the Commission stating all the officers of IRSME-94 batch were given grade in January, 2008 but his own confirmation status was not intimated to him and therefore a representation was made by him to the Railway Board. Since there was no reply to the representation he made, he sought information under the RTI Act.

2. The Bench of Mrs. Annapurna Dixit, Information Commissioner scheduled the hearing for 19th February, 2010.

3. Mr. Felix Kerkettia, Dir/Estt cum deemed PIO and Mr. Jaya Kumar, SO represented the Public Authority.

4. The Appellant was not present during the hearing.

Decision

1. The Respondent submitted that the Appellant had filed a number of applications and that the information sought in a number of them overlap each other. The Commission too had ordered in response to an appeal disposed of earlier on the same day in respect of an appeal on the same issues as in the present appeal, that the Appellant be allowed to inspect all the relevant files and be provided with DPC recommendations and copies of any other documents required by the Appellant from the files. In this case therefore the Commission reiterates the same decision and directs the PIO to allow the Appellant to inspect all files and be provided with copies of DPC meetings before 15 March, 2010..

6. The appeal is accordingly disposed of.

(Annapurna Dixit) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy:

(G. Subramanian) Deputy Registrar Cc:
1. Mr. Sanjay Poddar C-12, Arvind Nagar Air Force Central School Road Ratanada Jodhpur - 342 001.
2. The PIO Ministry of Railways O/o the Jt. Secy (G) & CPIO-II Railway Board Railway Bhawan New Delhi.
3. The Appellate Authority Ministry of Railways O/o the Advisor (Staff) Railway Board Railway Bhawan New Delhi.
4. Officer in charge, NIC
5. Press E Group, CIC