Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

Rahul Banerjee vs Central Industrial Security Force on 19 May, 2023

                                 के ीय सूचना आयोग
                        Central Information Commission
                             बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
                        Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                         नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067

ि तीय अपील सं या / Second Appeal No. CIC/CISFO/A/2022/639956

Shri Rahul Banerjee                                           ... अपीलकता/Appellant
                                  VERSUS/बनाम

PIO                                                     ... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Dy. Inspector General/Unit Office,
IGI Air Port, CISF
New Delhi

Date of Hearing                       :    15.05.2023
Date of Decision                      :    19.05.2023
Chief Information Commissioner        :    Shri Y. K. Sinha

Relevant facts emerging from appeal:

RTI application filed on               :   16.06.2022
PIO replied on                         :   22.06.2022
First Appeal filed on                  :   25.06.2022
First Appellate Order on               :   19.07.2022
2ndAppeal/complaint received on        :   22.07.2022

Information sought

and background of the case:

The Appellant filed an RTI application dated16.06.2022 seeking information on following points:-

I travelled by Air India flight AI636 with PNR JB36L from Delhi to Indore on

02.06.2022 and arrived at the security scanner at the Indira Gandhi International Airport Terminal 3 on the extreme right of the security area near the wall at about 14.00 hrs and the CISF staff refused to let me carry my Garmin GPS device saying that it was a satellite phone and illegally confiscated it about 14.20 hrs after I finished the frisking. I lodged a complaint with the CISF through email and in response yesterday 15.06.2022, I received a call from the phone number 91-1149652039 at 16.35 hours and a person claiming to be a staff of the CISF at IGI Airport Terminal 3 told me that as per the latest circular of the Bureau of Civil Aviation Security (BCAS) AvSec Order No. 02/2022 dated 04.03.2022, satellite phones were not allowed in either check in baggage or hand baggage and so my device had been confiscated. However, the device I was carrying was a Garmin GPS receiver which is not a restricted item as per the above circular.

The information that I want regarding this whole episode is as follows -

1. Why did the CISF staff wrongly confiscate my Garmin GPS device when it is not on the restricted list published by the Bureau of Civil Aviation Security by wrongly saying that it is a satellite phone.

2. What action has been taken against the erring CISF staff for thus wrongly confiscating my GPS device.

3. When will the CISF return my confiscated GPS device that they have traced to my address in Indore.

The PIO /Dy. Inspector General/Unit Office, IGI Air Port, CISF vide letter dated 22.06.2022 replied as under:-

Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 25.06.2022. The FAA/IG/Airport Sector, CISF vide order dated 19.07.2022 stated as under:-

Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.

Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:

The Appellant participated in the hearing through video conference. He state that the Respondent has not provided the relevant information as sought in the instant RTI Application.

The Respondent represented by Shri Lalit Panwar, DC and Shri Gaurav Dhiman, Inspector, participated in the hearing through video conference. He submitted that an adequate reply in terms of the mandate laid down under the RTI Act has been provided to the Appellant. He further reiterated the contents of the written submission dated 10.05.2023.

The Appellant interjected and informed the bench that he has not received a copy of the written submission dated 10.05.2023.

A written submission has been received from Shri Sachin Badshah, IPS, DIG/CASO & CPIO, CISF Unit, IGI Airport, Delhi, vide letter dated 10.05.2023, wherein the Commission has been apprised as under:

Decision:

Keeping in view the facts of the case and the submissions made by both the parties, the Commission is of the view that an appropriate response as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 has been provided by the Respondent. The Appellant was not been able to justify any allegation of corruption or violation of human rights in order to invoke the proviso to Section 24 (1) of the RTI Act, 2005. Hence, no further intervention of the Commission is required in the instant matter.

Be that as it may, the Commission observes that the Respondent has not provided a copy of the written submission dated 10.05.2023 to the Appellant and accordingly the Commission directs the PIO to send a copy of the same to the Appellant, within 7 days from the date of receipt of this order. This Appeal is disposed off accordingly.

Y. K. Sinha ( वाई. के . िस हा) Chief Information Commissioner (मु य सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स ािपत ित) S. K. Chitkara (एस. के . िचटकारा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26186535 Page 5 of 5