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 4, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Rohit Sansiya vs Dedicated Freight Corridor Corp Of ... on 12 November, 2018

                               क यसूचनाआयोग
                     CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                                बाबागंगानाथमाग
                            Baba Gangnath Marg,
                           मु नरका, नई द ल -110067
                          Munirka, New Delhi-110067

File No : CIC/DFCCI/A/2017/118005
In the matter of:
Rohit Sansiya

                                                                         ...Appellant
                                               Vs.
Manager/Admin/RTI
Dedicated Freight Corridor Corporation
of India Ltd, 5th Floor, Pragati Maidan,
Metro Station Building Complex, New Delhi - 110001.                     ...Respondent
                                                Dates
RTI application                         :      17.08.2016
CPIO reply                              :      01.12.2016
First Appeal                            :      13.12.2016
FAA Order                               :      21.02.2017
Second Appeal                           :      08.03.2017
Date of hearing                         :      27.06.2018, 25.10.2018
Facts:

The appellant vide RTI application dated 17.08.2016 sought information regarding the status of appellant's application form for appointment to the post of Executive (operations), Dedicated Freight Coordinator Corporation of India Ltd. The CPIO replied on 01.12.2016. The appellant was not satisfied with the reply of the CPIO and filed first appeal. The First Appellate Authority (FAA) disposed of the appeal by virtue of its order dated 21.02.2017. Aggrieved with the non-supply of the desired information from the respondent authority, the appellant filed second appeal under the provision of Section 19 of the RTI Act before the Central Information Commission on 08.03.2017.

Grounds for Second Appeal The CPIO did not provide the desired information.

                                                                           Page 1 of 4
 Order

         Appellant :       Present
         Respondent :      Shri S.K. Panda,
                           Deputy General Manager cum CPIO,

Dedicated Freight Corridor Corporation of India Ltd.

During the hearing, the respondent CPIO submitted that they had provided the requisite reply vide their letter dated 01.12.2016 and the First Appellate Authority (FAA)'s order dated 21.02.2017. The reply furnished to the appellant is just and proper and hence the case might be dismissed.

The appellant submitted that he was not satisfied with the reply received from the respondent.

On perusal of the relevant case record, it was noted by the Commission that the sought for information is not covered u/s 2(f) of the RTI Act. Although the replies provided both by respondent CPIO and by the first appellate authority on this point were just, proper and comprehensive, as the appellant pressed for information, the appellant is advised to send in his application number generated online while filing the prescribed form, to the respondent so that they are able to trace out the original records in this case.

The respondent CPIO was directed either to provide information i.e. the status of appellant's application form for the post of Executive (operations) in connection with the recruitment in the Dedicated Freight Coordinator Corporation of India Ltd or to file an affidavit in this regard that no record is available with the respondent authority concerned.

Be that as it may, since the requisite information is not provided to the appellant in this case, the present respondent authority is ordered to provide revised information in respect of the said RTI application, complete in all respects (legible copies), free of charge u/s 7(6) of the RTI Act within 15 days of the receipt of the order.

Page 2 of 4

The respondent CPIO is further directed to send a report containing the copy of the revised reply and the date of despatch of the same to the RTI appellant within 07 days thereafter to the Commission for record.

OR In case the relevant records are not available even after thorough search conducted once again, the present respondent CPIO, is directed to submit an affidavit that no record is available with them or with the agency who had conducted the examination in connection with the recruitment for the post of Executive (operations) in the Dedicated Freight Coordinator Corporation of India Ltd (DFCCL), within one month of the receipt of this order with a copy duly endorsed to the appellant within the same time period.

During the hearing, it came to the knowledge of the Commission that there is no adequate staff to support workload of increasing number of RTI applications received in the DFCCIL. The Managing Director, DFCCIL is directed to provide optimum infrastructure and adequate staff for the proper implementation of the RTI Act within one month of the receipt of this order of the Commission in the DFCCIL. An action taken report is to be submitted to the Commission within one month of the receipt of the order by the DFCCL without fail.

The concerned registry of this bench is directed to send a copy of this order to the Managing Director, DFCCIL for information and necessary follow up action in the matter.

With the above observation/directions, the appeal is disposed of. Copies of the order be sent to the concerned parties free of cost. Copy to: Manging Director, DFCCIL, Pragati Maidan, Metro Station Building Complex, New Delhi-110001 Compliance Order : 25.10.2018 The appellant vide his letter dated 27.08.2018 had filed a non-compliance petition before the Commission stating that the respondent authority had failed to comply with the order of the Commission.

Page 3 of 4

The respondent CPIO, Shri S K Panda, Deputy General Manager, Dedicated Freight Corridor Corporation of India Ltd (DFCCIL) was present at the registry. He submitted that he had complied with the order of the Commission dated 27.06.2018 and that the sought for information had been provided to the appellant on 24.08.2018 through e-mail.

The appellant was not present to plead for the above stated non compliance petition.

On perusal of the email dated 24.08.2017, it was noted by the Commission that proper reply had been provided to the appellant and the same had been provided through an e-mail. Moreover, as the appellant was not present, no further intervention of the Commission is required in the matter.

With the above observation, the non compliance petition is treated as closed.

Copies of the order be sent to all the concerned parties free of cost.

Amitava Bhattacharyya (अ मताभ भ ाचाय) Information Commissioner ( सच ू ना आय! ु त ) Authenticated true copy (अ भ"मा#णत स%या&पत " त) Ajay Kumar Talapatra (अजय कु मार तलपा ) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011- 26182594 / [email protected] दनांक / Date Page 4 of 4