Central Information Commission
Shalender Singh Tarkar vs Ministry Of Railways on 22 February, 2017
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
2nd Floor, 'B' Wing, August Kranti Bhawan,
Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi -110066
Tel : +91-11-26186535
Appeal No. CIC/VS/A/2015/000560
Appellant: Mr. Shailender Singh Tarkar,
At/PO-Sanhouli, Dist. Khagaria-851205
(Bihar)
(9430042819)
Respondent: Central Public Information Officer
DRM, East Central Railway, RTI Cell,
DRM Office, Samastipur-848101
Bihar
Date of Hearing: 15.12.2016
Dated of Decision: 15.12.2016
ORDER
Facts:
1. The appellant filed RTI application dated 15.10.2014 seeking information on 11 points regarding: name, designation, place of posting of Superintendent of Seharsa, Madhepura, Hasanpur, etc. and their residential address; name and tenure of service of D.C.I., Sr. DCM, Sr. COM and DRM of the Divisional office and other related issues.
2. The response of CPIO is not on record. The appellant filed First Appeal dated 22.11.2014 with First Appellate Authority (FAA). The response of FAA is not on record. The appellant filed second appeal on 24.02.2015 before the Commission on the ground that information should be provided to him.
Hearing:
3. Both the parties participated in the hearing through VC.
4. The appellant referred to his RTI application dated 15.10.2014 and stated that no information has been provided to him by the respondent or by the first appellate authority.1
5. The respondent stated that on 24.11.2016 and 14.12.2016, they have sent complete and point-wise reply/information to the appellant.
6. The appellant stated that no such reply has been received by him from the respondent. Besides, the appellant stated that he has observed that East Central Railway gives replies only when this Commission fixes hearings.
7. During the hearing, the Commission inquired from the respondent the reasons for delay in giving the reply to the RTI application of the appellant.
The respondent stated that collection of information/data took time and hence a delay occurred.
Discussion/ observation:
8. The Commission observed that the defense taken by the respondent at para No. 7 above is not reasonable, as there is a delay of two years in replying to the RTI application of the appellant. The first appellate authority has taken no action as per the records. The statement of the appellant has not been denied by the respondent.
9. The Commission further observed that the respondent does not appear to be serious about his duties under the RTI Act.
Decision:
10. The respondent is directed to send another copy of their replies dated 24.11.2016 & 14.12.2016 to the appellant, within 7 days from the date of receipt of this order.
11. The respondent is further directed to show-cause: (a) the reasons for delay in sending the reply by each CPIO who held the charge during the period; (b) indicate the names and designation of CPIO(s) who held charge during the period that delay occurred and (c) why fine should not be imposed on the CPIOs. The reply should be furnished within 2 weeks from the date of this order.
12. The Deputy Registrar is directed fix the case for hearing on 05.01.2017 at 10:45 a.m. when all concerned CPIOs may be personally present before the Commission along with their replies.2
13. Copy of the order may be sent to Divisional Railway Manager, East Central Railway who is directed to ensure service of this order on all concerned CPIOs and strict compliance of this order. The Divisional Railway Manager is also advised to appropriately admonish the First Appellate Authority for dereliction of duty, as he did not attend to the first appeal, as per our records.
Copy of the order be given to the parties free of cost.
Sd/-
(Radha Krishna Mathur) Chief Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy Sd/-
(S.C. Sharma) Dy. Registrar Copy to:
Divisional Railway Manager (DRM) East Central Railway, RTI Cell, DRM Office, Samastipur-848101 Bihar.
ADJUNCT ORDER DATED 5.1.2017 Hearing:
1. Respondents participated in the hearing through video conferencing. Appellant did not participate in the hearing.
2. Respondents stated that on 4.1.2017 they have received an intimation to attend the hearing on 5.1.2017.
3. Respondent stated that from 12.11.2014 to 11.12.2016 Shri A.M. Humayun, Shri Md. Zafar Alam and Shri Virender Kumar were holding the charge of CPIO.
4 Respondent stated that they had received appellant's RTI application on 12.11.2014. The respondent stated that they had sent complete and point-wise reply/information to the appellant on 24.11.2016 and 14.12.2016.
5. Appellant, vide email dated 5.1.2017 informed the Commission that he has not received copy of respondent's replies dated 24.11.2016 and 14.12.2016 till date 3 Observation:
6. In spite of Commission's direction dated 15.12.2016, all CPIOs may be personally present on 5.1.2017 before the Commission along with their replies, only the current CPIO had participated in the hearing through video conferencing at Samastipur.
Decision:
7. The respondent is directed to re-send copy of their replies dated 24.11.2016 & 14.12.2016 to the appellant, within 7 days from the date of receipt of this order.
8. The Deputy Registrar is directed to issue a fresh notice of hearing to all the parties on 16.2.2017 at 2.30 P.M., wherein all CPIOs should be personally present in Delhi.
9. DRM, Samastipur has failed to comply with the orders of the Commission dated 15.12.2016 to ensure service of the order on all concerned CPIOs and to ensure their presence.
10. The Commission would like to give one more opportunity to DRM.
Samastipur. He should ensure service of this order on concerned CPIOs and ensure their presence before the Commission in Delhi on16.2.2017 at 2.30 P.M.
11. The written explanation of the CPIOs should reach the Commission by 31.1.2017.
Copy of the order be given to the parties free of cost.
Sd/-
(Radha Krishna Mathur) Chief Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy Sd/-
(S.C. Sharma) Dy. Registrar Copy to: Divisional Railway Manager (DRM), East Central Railway, RTI Cell, DRM Office, Samastipur-848101 Bihar.
4Appeal No. CIC/VS/A/2015/000560 ADJUNCT ORDER DATED 16.02.2017 Hearing:
1. The Commission vide its order dated 05.01.2017 instructed the DRM, Samastipur that he should ensure service of the order on concerned CPIOs and ensure their presence before the Commission. The Commission further directed that each concerned CPIO should give their respective written explanation to the show-cause notice which may assist in taking a decision on penalty.
2. During the hearing, the respondent has placed on record a letter dated 05.01.2017 vide which the names of CPIOs were mentioned who held charge during the period. The table is reproduced below:
Details of deemed CPIO:
S. No. Name of deemed Designation Work Period Current Designation and
CPIO workplace
1. Sh. M.A.I. Humayun Sr. Divisional 13.04.2012 to Deputy Chief Commercial
Commercial 03.12.2014 Manager (Catering)
Manager East Central Railway,
Hajipur
2. Sh. Mohd. Zafar Sr. Divisional 03.12.2014 to Principal/J.R.T.I./ East
Aazam Commercial 09.06.2015 Central Railway/Muzzafarpur
Manager
3. Sh. B.N.P. Verma Sr. Divisional 10.06.2015 to Deputy Chief Commercial
Commercial 01.06.2016 Manager (Claims)
Manager East Central Railway,
Hajipur
4. Sh. Virendra Kumar Sr. Divisional 01.06.2016 to Presently posted
Commercial till date
Manager
Details of CPIO:
S. No. Name of CPIO Designation Work Period Current Designation and
workplace
5. Sh. Arun Kumar Sr. Divisional 11.10.2013 to Deputy Chief Engineer
Yadav Personnel 06.10.2015 (T.M.C.) East Central
Officer Railway/Mughalsarai
5
6. Sh. Ujjawal Anand Sr. Divisional 06.10.2015 to Sr. Divisional Personnel
Personnel 04.03.2016 Officer/ East Central
Officer Railway/Dhanbad
7. Sh. B.N. Singh Sr. Divisional 04.03.2016 to till Presently posted
Personnel date
Officer
3. The respondent Shri B. N. Singh along with other CPIOs i.e. Shri M.A.I. Humayun, Dy. CCM/Catering, Shri B.N.P. Vema, Ex Sr. DCM, Shri Ujjawal Anand, Sr. DPO who held charge during the period were personally present in the hearing and placed on record their written submissions/explanations dated 30.01.2017, 10.02.2017, 16.02.2017 and 02.02.2017 respectively.
4. During the hearing, the nodal CPIO Sh. B.N. Singh apprised that all concerned CPIOs had been informed to be personally present in the hearing.
It is seen that despite instructions of the Commission CPIOs as mentioned in the table above at serial nos. 2, 4 and 5 were not present in the hearing and did not give their written submissions/explanations to the Commission.
5. From the perusal of the records, it is seen that complete information has not yet been furnished to the appellant. It is further noted from the records that the remaining information has to be furnished by the deemed CPIO of Commercial Department.
6. The ex-CPIO of Commercial Deptt. Shri M.A.I. Humayun stated that the information sought by the applicant was extensive, technical and time taking. The concerned staff were advised to compile item wise information without delay but subsequently he was transferred on 03.12.2014 and he had handed over the charge to his successor on 03.12.2014.
7. The nodal CPIO Sh. B.N. Singh stated that since his joining he has maintained a proper mechanism for monitoring the RTI applications but in this case they had to collect the information from various departments, therefore, it caused delay in furnishing the reply to the appellant.
Discussion/ Observation:
8. In spite of Commission's direction dated 05.01.2017, all CPIOs were not present in the hearing and it highlights the failure on the part of DRM, 6 Samastipur that he has failed to comply with the orders of the Commission twice.
9. It is observed that information on point 10 of the RTI application dated 15.10.2014 has still not been provided to the appellant. The appellant vide his letter dated 16.02.2017 informed the Commission that complete information has not been provided to him.
10. The Commission further observed that the CPIO, Commercial Deptt. was not present in the hearing. He has also not provided complete information to the appellant. He has not sent his written submissions/explanation to the Commission for the delay. This shows that the present CPIO, Commercial Deptt. does not appear to be serious about his duties under the RTI Act.
Decision:
11. The respondent is directed to provide information on point 10 of the RTI application dated 15.10.2014 to the appellant within 7 days from the date of receipt of this order.
12. Copy of the order be sent to Divisional Railway Manager, East Central Railway who is directed to ensure service of this order on nodal CPIO and CPIOs as mentioned in the table above at serial nos. 2, 4 and 5. It should be ensured that they are personally present before the Commission in Delhi on 16.03.2017 at 04:00 p.m.
13. The nodal CPIO should ensure that CPIOs as mentioned in the table above at serial nos. 2, 4 and 5 should give their written submissions/explanation to the Commission for delays before the next date of hearing.
Copy of the order be given to the parties free of cost.
(Radha Krishna Mathur) Chief Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy (S.C. Sharma) Dy. Registrar 7 Copy to: 1. Divisional Railway Manager (DRM), East Central Railway, RTI Cell, DRM Office, Samastipur-848101 Bihar.
2. Sh. M.A.I. Humayun, Dy.CCM G.M. (Comml.), B-Block, East Central Railway, Distt. Vaishali, Hajipur, Bihar
3. Sh. Mohd. Zafar Aazam, Principal Zonal Railway Training Institute Muzaffarpur, Bihar
4. Sh. B.N.P. Verma, Dy. CCM G.M. (Comml.), B-Block, East Central Railway, Distt. Vaishali, Hajipur, Bihar
5. Sh. Virendra Kumar, Sr. Divisional (Comml.) Manager DRM Office, Samastipur, Bihar
6. Sh. Arun Kumar Yadav, Dy. Chief Engineer Plant Depot, Mughalsarai, Uttar Pradesh
7. Sh. Ujjawal Anand, Sr. DPO Dhanbad Division, DRM Office, Dhanbad-826001
8. Sh. B.N. Singh, Sr. DPO DRM Office, Samastipur-848101 Bihar.
8