Central Information Commission
Kamlesh Sharma vs Northern Railway Firozpur on 26 September, 2023
Author: Uday Mahurkar
Bench: Uday Mahurkar
के न्द्रीयसच
ू नाआयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबागंगनाथमागग, मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नईनिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
द्वितीयअपीलसख्ं या / Second Appeal No.:- CIC/NRALF/A/2022/652745-UM
Ms. Kamlesh Sharma
....अपीलकताा/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO
M/o. Railways,
Sr. Dfm&Cpio,
Northern Railway,
Drm's Office, Finance Department,
Ferozepur Division, Ferozepur, Punjab- 152001
प्रद्वतवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 20.09.2023
Date of Decision : 25.09.2023
Date of RTI application 20.07.2022
CPIO's response 05.08.2022
Date of the First Appeal 08.08.2022
First Appellate Authority's response 14.09.2022
Date of diarized receipt of Appeal by the Commission Nil
ORDER
FACTS The Appellant vide his RTI application sought information, as under:-
The CPIO, Northern Railway, vide letter dated 05.08.2022 furnished a reply to the Appellant. Dissatisfied with the reply received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal. The FAA Page 1 of 3 vide order dated 14.09.2022 furnished a reply to the Appellant.Thereafter, the Appellant filed a Second Appeal before the Commission.
HEARING:
Facts emerging during the hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant: Present through AC (Grandson Mr Avinash Sharma ) Respondent: Mr Nimje Dinesh Namdeo DFM, Present through AC The Appellant's grandson while reiterating the contents of the RTI Application submitted that proper information has not been furnished so far. He informed that the Appellant Smt. Kamlesh Sharma, is the W/O Late Sham Sunder, who was posted in northern railway firozpur division, city Mukerian. He retired on 30.11.1997 and at the time of retirement the railway authority mentioned rejection in retirement file showing QNV (QUATER NOT VACATED) and for this reason the Appellant's husband Late Sham Sunder did not receive his death cum Retirement gratuity of Rs 102336. He said being unwell after retirement the Appellants husband could not go for the DCRG enquiry. Further the Appellant after the death of her husband on 24.04.2003 received very less amount of pension, he said and added that When enquired she came to know that the Appellant's husband's DCRG application had been rejected. She filed the complaint for the same but Firozpur division did not response and misguided her, he stated and added that she had no other option but to file the RTI Application.
The Respondent in reply submitted that the matter is 25 years old but yet all the available information has been furnished to the Appellant along with the death cum Retirement gratuity of Rs 102336. He said that the matter has also been resolved through the CP GRAM portal.
The Appellant claimed that he Respondent has been providing vague and indirect replies, due to which they are unable to get proper information.
DECISION:
Keeping in view the facts of the case and the submissions made by both the parties ,the Commission directs the CPIO to re examine the RTI Application and furnish correct, cogent and complete information to the Appellant, strictly in accordance with the spirit of transparency and Page 2 of 3 accountability as enshrined in the RTI Act, 2005 within a period of 21 days from the date of receipt of this order under the intimation to the Commission.
Further the commission advises the CPIO to consider the case of the Appellant in the backdrop of the above facts and take corrective action if required, thus adhering to the law of natural justice.
The Appeal stands disposed accordingly.
(Uday Mahurkar) (उदय माहूरकर) ू ना आयुक्त) (Information Commissioner) (सच Authenticated true copy (अद्विप्रमाद्वणत एवं सत्याद्वपत प्रद्वत) (R. K. Rao) (आर.के . राव) (Dy. Registrar) (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26182598 / [email protected] द्वदनांक / Date: 25.09.2023 Page 3 of 3