Central Information Commission
Vijay Kumar Malhotra vs South Western Railway on 27 April, 2018
क य सूचना आयोग
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
बाबा गंगानाथ माग
Baba Gangnath Marg,
मु नरका, नई द ल -110067
Munirka, New Delhi-110067
Tel: 011 - 26182593/26182594
Email: [email protected]
File No.: CIC/SWRLY/A/2017/309935
In the matter of:
Vijay Kumar Malhotra
...Appellant
VS
DGM(G)/PIO, HQS Office, South Western Railway,
3rd floor, East Wing, GM Office Building, Gadag Road,
Hubballi, Karnataka- 580020
...Respondent
Dates
RTI application : 18.05.2016
CPIO reply : Not on Record
First Appeal : 13.07.2016
FAA Order : 01.08.2016
Second Appeal : 21.09.2016
Date of hearing : 19.04.2018
Facts:
The appellant vide RTI application dated 18.05.2016 sought information on two points in respect of whether any clarification had been received by the APO/TFC/UBL with regard to the basic entry pay fixation of traffic apprentices of the batch of 2004-2006 as sought from the CPO/SWR/UBL vide letter dated 22.10.2015, if yes, what clarification had been provided by the CPO/SWR and if no clarification had been received, what steps were taken for expediting receipt of the said clarification from the CPO/SWR. The CPIO's reply is not on record. The appellant on receiving no reply from the CPIO filed first appeal on 13.07.2016. The First Appellate Authority (FAA) disposed of the appeal by 1 virtue of its order dated 01.08.2016. Aggrieved with the non-supply of the desired information from the respondent authority, the appellant filed a second appeal under the provision of Section 19 of the RTI Act before the Central Information Commission on 21.09.2016.
Grounds for Second Appeal The CPIO did not provide the desired information.
Order
Appellant : Absent
Respondent : Shri MA Johnson,
Secretary to Chief Personnel Officer cum PIO, South Western Railway During the hearing, the respondent PIO submitted that they had provided the requisite reply vide their letter dated 20.09.2017. The reply furnished to the appellant is just and proper, hence the case might be dismissed. Since the same was not available in the case record, the respondent PIO was asked to read the same over the VC facility. He was intimated to send a copy of the same to the Commission through e-mail for record.
The appellant was not present to plead for his case.
In view of the above, a Show Cause notice is issued to the then PIO, Deputy General Manager (G) Railway Board u/s 20 of the RTI Act to explain the following:-
Why no reply was provided to the appellant even after two years.
The explanation to the above stated Show Cause notice is to be submitted to the Commission by the respondent CPIO/PIO within 15 days of the receipt of this order.
The present respondent CPIO is to serve a copy of this order to the then respondent CPIO under intimation to the Commission. On receipt of the explanation to the said Show Cause Notice, further action as deemed appropriate will be taken.2
The respondent CPIO should note that in the event of non-submission of the explanation within the time stipulated above, the Commission has the liberty to take the required decision ex-parte against the concerned respondent CPIO.
The information provided is just and proper and moreover as the appellant was not present to contest his case, interference of the Commission is not called for.
With the above Show cause/direction, the appeal is disposed of. Copies of the order be sent to the concerned parties free of cost.
[Amitava Bhattacharyya] Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy (A.K. Talapatra) Deputy Registrar 3