Central Information Commission
P Ramchander Rao vs Directorate General Of Training on 10 July, 2025
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
File Nos. : CIC/DGTRG/C/2024/606151
CIC/DGTRG/C/2024/607060
P Ramchander Rao ....िशकायतकता /Complainant
VERSUS
बनाम
PIO,
Directorate General of
Training, B-2, Kaushal Bhawan,
Pusa Road, Karol Bagh, New
Delhi - 110005
PIO,
Directorate General of
Training 7th Floor, New
Kaushal Bhawan Near
Safdarjung Railway
Station Chanakyapuri, New
Moti Bagh, New Delhi - 110023 .... ितवादीगण /Respondents
Date of Hearing : 03.07.2025
Date of Decision : 16.07.2025
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari
The above-mentioned complaints are clubbed together as the Complainant is
common and subject-matter is similar in nature and hence are being
disposed of through a common order.
CIC/DGTRG/C/2024/606151
Relevant facts emerging from complaint:
Page 1 of 6
RTI application filed on : 30.12.2023
CPIO replied on : Not on record
First appeal filed on : Not on record
First Appellate Authority's order : Not on record
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 13.02.2024
Information sought:
1. The Complainant filed an RTI application dated 30.12.2023 (online) seeking the following information:
"1. Please furnish the date on which the marks uploaded in the NCVT website pertaining to Act Apprenticeship Trainees who have undergone Act Apprenticeship Training between 19.10.2016 to 18.10.2017 in Electrical Loco Shed Vijayawada of South Central Railway and attended the examination between 17.12.2018 to 29.12.2018
2. Certified copies of All Noting sheets of the file pertaining to the uploading of marks in the NCVT website pertaining to Act Apprenticeship Trainees who have undergone Act Apprenticeship Training between 19.10.2016 to 18.10.2017 in Electrical Loco Shed Vijayawada of South Central Railway and attended the examination between 17.12.2018 to 29.12.2018.
3. Certified Copies of the marks list obtained by all the Act Apprenticeship Trainees who have undergone Act Apprenticeship Training between 19.10.2016 to 18.10.2017 in Electrical Loco Shed Vijayawada of South Central Railway and attended the examination between 17.12.2018 to 29.12.2018. I am ready to pay any amount for furnishing the documents sought if the amount paid is not sufficient subject to informing me within the time as per the provisions of The Right to Information Act-2005"
2. Not having received any response from the CPIO, the complainant failed to file a First Appeal. The FAA order is not on record.
3. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, complainant approached the Commission with the instant Complaint.
CIC/DGTRG/C/2024/607060 Relevant facts emerging from complaint:
RTI application filed on : 30.12.2023
Page 2 of 6
CPIO replied on : 19.02.2024
First appeal filed on : Not on record
First Appellate Authority's order : Not on record 2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 19.02.2024 Information sought:
4. The Complainant filed an RTI application dated 30.12.2023 (online) seeking the following information:
"1. Please furnish the date on which the marks uploaded in the NCVT website pertaining to Act Apprenticeship Trainees who have undergone Act Apprenticeship Training between 19.10.2016 to 18.10.2017 in Electrical Loco Shed Vijayawada of South Central Railway and attended the examination between 17.12.2018 to 29.12.2018
2. Certified copies of All Noting sheets of the file pertaining to the uploading of marks in the NCVT website pertaining to Act Apprenticeship Trainees who have undergone Act Apprenticeship Training between 19.10.2016 to 18.10.2017 in Electrical Loco Shed Vijayawada of South Central Railway and attended the examination between 17.12.2018 to 29.12.2018.
3. Certified Copies of the marks list obtained by all the Act Apprenticeship Trainees who have undergone Act Apprenticeship Training between 19.10.2016 to 18.10.2017 in Electrical Loco Shed Vijayawada of South Central Railway and attended the examination between 17.12.2018 to 29.12.2018. I am ready to pay any amount for furnishing the documents sought if the amount paid is not sufficient subject to informing me within the time as per the provisions of The Right to Information Act-2005"
5. The CPIO furnished a reply to the complainant on 19.02.2024 stating as under:
"This has reference to your RTI dated 30.12.2023 the information sought by you is given below:
Point 1: Kindly provide the Apprenticeship Registration Number and apprenticeship contract registration number generated by the Apprenticeship Portal in respect of applicant Shri Advocate P. Ramchander Rao Parnandi."Page 3 of 6
6. Being dissatisfied, the complainant failed to file a First Appeal. The FAA order is not on record.
7. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, complainant approached the Commission with the instant Complaint.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Complainant: Present through Video-Conference. Respondent: Shri Vidit Singh, Deputy Director & CPIO and Shri Hitesh Kumar, Deputy Director present in person.
8. Written submissions of the Complainant are taken on record.
9. The Complainant, during the hearing, reiterated the contents of his above-mentioned RTI applications and instant complaints and submitted that till date information has not been provided to him by the Respondent.
10. Written submissions of the Respondent are taken on record and the relevant extracts of the same is reproduced hereinbelow:
"It is submitted by the respondent that the case of the application pertains to providing the information of the apprentice trainees which pertains to the personal information of the trainees and well protected within the provisions of Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, 2005. Therefore, disclosing the requested information may involve the breach of privacy of the concerned apprentice trainees. It is further stated that the requested information has been withheld by the respondent since the applicant has also failed to establish the test of a larger public interest that would be achieved by seeking the information requested from the respondent. That the personal marks list of the apprentice trainees between 17.12.2018 to 29.12.2018 as sought for by the appellant are exempt from disclosure since the overriding public interest has not been proved or established by the appellant."
"That the present RTI was filed on dated 30.12.2023, which was then transferred to the undersigned on 01.01.2024. Thereafter, the issue was duly examined and a reply was submitted to the applicant on 19.02.2024.
2. It is most respectfully submitted that the timeline to reply within 30 Page 4 of 6 days commences from the date the PIO receives the application i.e. from 01.01.2024 in the present case. Accordingly, the effective delay may be calculated from 01.01.2024 rather than from 30.12.2023. 3. It is further submitted that based on the abovementioned dates, the delay in the present matter amounted to 20 days. 4. It is submitted that the delay in submitting the reply is deeply regretted by the undersigned, which occurred in good faith, while ensuring due diligence in handling information that pertains to personal marks and certified copies of the candidates, which were available with a different section of the office. The petitioner/applicant had failed to establish the test of larger public interest while seeking access to third party information. Therefore, the undersigned deemed it necessary to seek guidance from other senior officers before replying to the RTI. There was no malafide intention on the part of the undersigned. The delay was purely procedural and due to genuine caution in handling potentially exempt information. It is requested that delay may please be condoned and care will be taken in future to reply to RTI requests well within the timeline of 30 days."
11. The Respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that factual position in the matter has already been informed to the Complainant. Further, copy of their written submissions has also been shared with the Complainant on his e-mail ID.
12. The Commission also noted that proof of having served a copy of his Complaint on the Respondent has not been uploaded by the Complainant while filing the same before the Commission. On a query, the Respondent confirms non-service.
Decision:
13. The Commission observes from perusal of records that the main premise of the instant complaints was non-receipt of desired information from the Respondent. The Commission observes that the CPIO informed factual position in the matter to the Complainant as per his RTI applications.
14. The Commission finds no infirmity in the reply of the CPIO and the same was found to be in consonance with the provisions of RTI Act.
15. Now, being a Complaint under Section 18 of the RTI Act, the facts of the case do not warrant any action under Section 18(2) of the RTI Act against the CPIO as it does not bear any mala fides or an intention to deliberately obstruct the access to information as alleged by the Complainant. Here, it is relevant to quote a judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the matter of Registrar of Companies & Ors v. Dharmendra Kumar Garg & Anr. [W.P.(C) 11271/2009] dated 01.06.2012 wherein it was held:
Page 5 of 6" 61. It can happen that the PIO may genuinely and bonafidely entertain the belief and hold the view that the information sought by the querist cannot be provided for one or the other reasons. Merely because the CIC eventually finds that the view taken by the PIO was not correct, it cannot automatically lead to issuance of a show cause notice under Section 20 of the RTI Act and the imposition of penalty. The legislature has cautiously provided that only in cases of malafides or unreasonable conduct, i.e., where the PIO, without reasonable cause refuses to receive the application, or provide the information, or knowingly gives incorrect, incomplete or misleading information or destroys the information, that the personal penalty on the PIO can be imposed...."
16. The Commission observes that there is a delay on the part of the Respondent in informing the final factual position in the matter to the Complainant. In view of this, the Respondent is directed to be cautious in future and ensure that reply/information should be provided to the RTI applicants within stipulated period as per the RTI Act.
17. In view of the above, no relief can be granted in the matter.
The above-mentioned complaints are 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, Directorate General of Training 7th Floor, New Kaushal Bhawan Near Safdarjung Railway Station Chanakyapuri, New Moti Bagh, New Delhi - 110023 Page 6 of 6 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)