Central Information Commission
Anil Gupta vs Northern Railway Firozpur on 6 June, 2022
Author: Uday Mahurkar
Bench: Uday Mahurkar
के न्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ मागग, मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई दिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
द्वितीय अपील संख्या / Second Appeal No.:- CIC/NRALF/A/2021/618649-UM
Mr. ANIL GUPTA
....अपीलकताग/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO
Northern Railway
DRM Office, Firozpur Division,
Firozpur - 152001
प्रनतिािीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 01.06.2022
Date of Decision : 02.06.2022
Date of RTI application 11.01.2021
CPIO's response 18.01.2021
Date of the First Appeal 05.02.2021
First Appellate Authority's response Not on record
Date of diarized receipt of Appeal by the Commission Nil
ORDER
FACTS The Appellant vide his RTI application sought information on 03 points, as under:-
etc. The CPIO, Northern Railway, vide letter dated 18.01.2021 furnished a reply to the Appellant. Dissatisfied with the reply received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal. The order of FAA, if any, is not on record of the Commission. Thereafter, the Appellant filed a Second Appeal before the Commission. HEARING:
Facts emerging during the hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant: Mr. Anil Gupta participated through AC, Respondent: Absent The Respondent remained absent during the hearing. Despite its continuous efforts, the Commission was not able to contact the Respondent.
The Appellant while reiterating the contents of the RTI Application stated that he had sought the information regarding payment of a tender awarded to him. He further stated that vide letter dated 18.01.2021, an incorrect reply was furnished by the Respondent which could not fulfill his purpose. He requested the Commission to direct the public authority to furnish satisfactory information.
The Commission was in receipt of a written submission by the Respondent dated 31.05.2022 which is taken on record.
The Respondent was not present to contest the submissions of the Appellant.
DECISION:
Keeping in view the facts of the case and the submissions made by the Appellant, the Commission observes that an appropriate reply has not been furnished by the CPIO as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005. Therefore, the Commission directs the Respondent to re- examine the RTI application and furnish a detailed and an updated revised reply to the Appellant, strictly in accordance with the spirit of transparency and accountability as enshrined in the RTI Act, 2005 within a period of 21 days from the receipt of this order under the intimation to the Commission.
The Appeal stands disposed accordingly.
(Uday Mahurkar) (उदय माहूरकर) (Information Commissioner) (सूचना आयुक्त) Authenticated true copy (अभिप्रमाणित एवं सत्यापित प्रतत) (R. K. Rao) (आर. के. राव) (Dy. Registrar) (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26182598 / [email protected] दिनांक / Date: 02.06.2022