Central Information Commission
Sanjay Poddar vs Ministry Of Railways (Railway Board) on 30 October, 2025
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
File No: CIC/MORLY/A/2025/112087
Sanjay Poddar .....अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
PIO,
RAILWAY BOARD, RAIL BAHWAN,
NEW DELHI - 110001 .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 27.10.2025
Date of Decision : 30.10.2025
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari
(Total number of 13 Second Appeals of the Appellant are listed today for
hearing before the Commission)
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 07.10.2024
CPIO replied on : 10.12.2024, 20.11.2024, 07.01.2025,
22.10.2025, 21.10.2025, 24.10.2025
First appeal filed on : 17.02.2025
First Appellate Authority's order : Not on record
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 01.04.2025
Information sought:
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 07.10.2024 (offline) seeking the following information:
"I am a compulsorily retired Railway servant belonging to Indian Railway Service of Mechanical Engineers batch 94 and seek the following Page 1 of 15 information in accordance with the RTI Act-2005. The necessary application fee of Rs 10/- is paid vide the RTI documentation fee ticket No. UFQ 91886741 [96DDDTX499 6741]
1) Section 23 of the RPWD Act 2016 is with regard to the Appointment of the Grievance Redressal Officer. Its subsection (2) states Any person aggrieved with the non-compliance of the provisions of the section 20, may file a complaint with the Grievance Redressal Officer, who shall investigate it and shall take up the matter with the establishment for corrective action. In connection with this kindly provide the necessary notification as issued by RB for creation of such a post therein (the Railway Board). Also provide me the names of all the officers in the Railway Board who were either appointed on this post or were asked to officiate from time to time till date, since the issue of the notification.
2)Distinct functions of the (each and every) various members of DPC (Departmental promotion Committee) who conduct it (the DPC) for promotion of an officer on Indian Railways from one grade to another.
3) laid down attributes required of an officer on the Indian Railways for becoming a DRM (Divisional Railway Manager).
4)In legal parlance a phrase "...no prejudice will be caused...if..."is frequently used by the railway administration to assuage a serving employee in a litigation. Kindly enumerate the benefits that automatically accrues to the employee or the rule which comes into play the moment the phrase is used by the administration in such a Litigation.
5) Function of the Personnel department in the Indian Railways. May kindly provide a list containing the exhaustive details.
6) Are persons with disabilities, particularly suffering from mental illness, employed on the Indian Railways? If the answer is in affirmative, kindly provide the section of the RPwD Act 2016 which is being followed for this purpose.
7)A senior scale officer gets promoted to JAG (Junior Administrative Grade) by an RB (Railway Board) notification but his grade pay remains at Rs 6600/- that of a senior scale office, till he gets promoted into SG (grade pay Rs 8700/-]. Under which rule this is permitted? Kindly provide copy of the necessary rule.Page 2 of 15
8) Service career related matters are well recorded and maintained in various manner/form like the personal file, ACR/APAR dossiers, character roll, service record etc. Kindly let me know if there is/are any other form(s)through which the service career record is maintained. Also let me please know the type of details that are maintained in each form. Is precedent book also one such form in which certain service carrier related records are kept? If so, kindly provide all such details which are available in my precedent book.
9) A copy of the notification issued by RB declaring/nominating CRB (Chairman Railway Board) to be the ex-officio member of the Central Advisory Committee on Disability. Since such a declaration how many such meetings have been attended by the CRB? Copy of the minutes drawn during each held meeting may kindly be provided. Also please enumerate the duties and responsibilities of the CRB as a member of the said committee
10) kindly provide me the relevant extract of the RTI Act-2005 as per which a CPIO who is lower in rank to the Appellate Authority is empowered to handle/respond a first appeal. i.e. the section/sub-section of the RTI Act-2005, as per which a CPIO can also act as a First Appellate Authority.
11) The extant policy letter as circulated by RB which presently empowers the zonal administration not to allow inspection of the ACR (Annual Confidential Record) prior to the year 2009. While replying to this query please don't rely on very old letters as issued by RB which have lost their relevance in view of the ever-developing service jurisprudence.
12) The Various landmark judgements as passed by the hon'ble Supreme Court since the inception of the Person with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of rights and full participation) Act, 1995 and subsequent to it the more progressive RPwD Act, 2016. The imports from these judgements provides invaluable inputs to the DoPT in formulating necessary policies for persons with disabilities in government services.
Kindly provide copies of all such DoPT letter which have been subsequently adopted by the Indian Railways for its employees (staff and the officers) as policy letters for the benefit of the disabled persons.
13) Is there any legal cell in the RB to address the various legal issues arising out of day today working? If so, kindly provide information about its organizational structure with its functional and administrative heads Page 3 of 15 and also duties and responsibilities of each official attached to this organization.
14)An act of submission of a false information casting aspersion on an individual cannot be at all taken lightly, particularly when such a falsehood led to the premature/compulsory retirement of the individual from the government service. In the circumstances as stated above kindly quote the D&AR rule which is applicable to a railway servant under which he/she can be penalized for such an action which is tantamount to lack of integrity and devotion towards duty and also unbecoming of a railway servant. Also state the maximum punishment which can be meted out to such employees/officers as per the laid guidelines if any.
15) (I belong to the Indian Railway Service of mechanical Engineering, batch 94, for short IRSME-94). All my promotion cases e.g. promotion from JAG to SG (Selection Grade) and SG to SAG (Senior Administrative Grade) were put up before the DPC held at RB along with the batch IRSME-97 instead of IRSME-94. Kindly provide me a copy of the service rule adopting/following which this change in my batch was allowed [from 94 to 97). In all such DPC's conducted at RB whether it was ever informed to the DPC members that my batch is IRSME-94. Kindly provide all necessary documents which bears testimony to the supra.
16) kindly reveal from which code or manual being followed on Indian Railway, the concept of batch and original batch has been borrowed for a Group A officer recruited through COMBINED ENGINEERING SERVICES EXAMINATION conducted by UPSC. Said in other words kindly provide me the authentic source of origin of this jargon [batch and original batch]
17) 20 My letter dated 31.03.2021 Addressed to DSE(S)/RB Shri Sushil Kumar Singh with a copy of it marked to CVC-GOI and various others may kindly be referred to. Kindly provide me a copy of the necessary vigilance investigation report as done by the RB into my compulsory retirement case.
18) Para No 524 and 545 of the IRMM (Indian Railway Medical Manual) are applicable to non-gazetted staff on the Indian Railways. Kindly provide me a copy of the rule under which these Paras can be applied on a Gazetted class I railway employee.
19) "The officer is mentally not sound and remains depressed all the time" appears to be a statement made by a psychiatric doctor and is Page 4 of 15 some way valid for he is professionally qualified to do so but what about a person who makes such a comment on an individual and is not remotely connected with the profession of psychiatry? Please quote the Clause of the Mental Health Act 2017 which is either violated or followed when a reporting officer who is a technical person makes such a declaration in the health column of my APAR for year 2012-13.
20)kindly provide me a copy of the rule under which a supernumerary post can be created on the Indian Railways for a person suffering from mental disability.
21) Copy of the policy as framed by RB for transfer and posting of employees with disabilities with due regards to the section 20(5) of the RPwD Act 2016.
22) Kindly refer to the railway board letter No.2016/E(TRG.)/6/30/ (52 and 53 AMP) dated 09.08.2016 on the subject: -52 and 53 advance management programme to be conducted at NAIR/Vadodara, ICLIF/Malaysia & INSEAD/ Singapore. For Regulars (53 AMP) at serial No 23 Sanjay Podder has been shown to be belonging to the service IRSME with batch as 1997. Sanjay Podder qualified the 1994 engineering service examination and is therefore entitled to belong to batch 1994. Has Sanjay Podder been relegated to the 1997 batch? If so, kindly arrange to provide name and designation of the authority/ authorities who relegated Sanjay Podder to 1997 batch. ii) Provide copy of the rule under which such a relegation took place.
23) No of serving employees on the Indian Railways who are undergoing psychiatric treatment and the policy as per which their warking performance is monitored. Data of such employees suffering from psychiatric ailment may also be provided who are continuously performing poorly and how many among these have been subjected to special medical for assessing their suitability for the job under FR 56(J) and how many have been given compulsory retirement? The data should be separately provided for the Gazetted and Non-Gazetted staff.
24) What did the DPC (departmental promotion committee) commented while considering my (Sanjay Podder) promotion from JAG to SG (selection grade) in the year 2007, 2008, 2009 & 2010 respectfully. i) Copy/copies of the DPC proceedings for these years may be provided. ii) Also kindly provide the DPC recommendation in the year 2011 or 2012 which Considered me to be fit for promotion into the selection grade (SG) Page 5 of 15
25) Copy of the rule under which I was not immediately promoted into the senior scale after the confirmation on 10.10.2000 when it was highly due. (Date of joining 02.01.1996, date of promotion into the senior scale 12.04.2001)
26) Copies of the all the performance reports both from SrDME(DSL) Sri P.C.Verma & CWM/PL Shri Arunendra Kumar, based on which I was given the confirmation after the completion of the probation period.
27) Recommendation made by appropriate authority/authorities before sending me for the AMP at Malaysia and Singapore. Copy the recommendation note/letter may be provided.
28) Copies of the recommendation/comments passed by the various DPC held for promotion from SG to SAG on the entries made in the health column of my APAR for the year 2012-13 by reporting officer Sri P.A Lamghare CRSE(FR)/CR which was further elaborated by the reviewing officer Sri W.K.Pradhan PCME/CR
29) A transfer cancellation matter undergoes various stages before being finally implemented by an administrative order and this entire process from making representation to the administration for cancellation of transfer; filing of a court case; its adjudication by Hon'ble CAT; extension time seeking by the administration for implementation of the judgement; review of the administrative order and final implementation took more than two years. For such a scenario, kindly provide me a copy of the rule which says that this period of more than two years can be treated as that of unauthorized absence from duty.
30) For the purpose of breaking the monopoly and to introduce competition with an overall objective to bring down the price of an item efforts should be made by the railways to develop new vendors. For one such item "Torsion Soring for ALT of BLC wagon M/S HOLLAND and CO LTD part No68858 or similar" what efforts have been made by RDSO? i) All correspondence related to above may be furnished along with the unit cost of the item at which it has been purchased in the recent past on the Indian Railways. ii) Copy of the purchase order may be furnished
31) Is fudging, fabricating, tempering, forging a document for the purpose of denying promotion to class | gazetted officer a serious offence? If so kindly provide me a copy of the rule under which punitive Page 6 of 15 action can be taken against a Railway Servant who involves himself in such a practise.
32) A copy of the specific rule under which commutation of pension can be denied to a class | gazetted officer retired compulsorily under FR 56(j) even if the demand for the same was made by the retiree.
33) Authority or official who can be held responsible for a missing document(s) from the ACR dossier of a class I gazetted officer.
34) A copy of the rule or notification as per which a First Appellate Authority is exempted or dispensed with, from mentioning "If you are not satisfied with this order, you may prefer an appeal to the chief information commissioner within ... at... address given below" while replying to an RTI appeal.
35) A copy of the rule under which the CRB (Chairman Railway Board) who is also an ex-officio member of the Central Advisory Board on Disability and having specified responsibilities towards such a Board can refuse to accept the pleading/representation of an employee on the ground of his suffering from mental ailment.
36)A copy of the Rule under which despite availability of LAP & HLAP in the leave Account of a class I gazetted officer, LWP can be sanctioned for a period to be counted in the total service of the officer.
37) Can an intellectually very sound officer be graded as Average in his ACR/APAR? If so, kindly provide me a copy of the guideline on writing ACR/APAR as issued by RB to above affect.
38) kindly provide me copy of the APAR for the year 2017-18, I request that the reply should not be like that since the reportee officer did not fill up the APAR, it is not available, for in SPARROW force forward can be done and APAR can be initiated by the reporting officer, subsequently reviewed and finally given acceptance by the accepting authority even if there is a failure on the part of the reportee officer in not initiating it at all.
39) AERB (Atomic Energy Regulatory Board) is the agency entrusted with the job of inspection and release of licence for machines using radiation in medical diagnostic facilities like the X-Ray machine etc. so as to ensure that radiation levels are maintained within the permissible safety limits Page 7 of 15 at the facilities. Kindly provide me copies of the licences that have issued by the AERB for the X-Ray machine(s) in the Byculla Railway hospital, Mumbai since the year 2009.
40) Para no 26 of the written statement in the OA No323 of 2021 as submitted by the respondents' states that the applicant never made a representation to the Medical Board before his retirement vide the impugned order dated 03.12.2019 on the basis of his performance. Kindly provide me a copy of the rule under which the sufferer has to approach the administration for conduct of a Medical Board on him and not otherwise ile it is not the responsibility of the administration to conduct the medical board on the suffering employee when it found him to be a non-performer due to his ill health..
41) Besides the entire service record of an employee providing vital inputs in ascertaining whether an employee can be subjected to compulsory retirement under the FR 56(j), the performance can be also be assessed by looking into the files dealt with by him or in any papers or reports prepared and submitted by him. In this connection I am enclosing several letters as written by me on official matters which were submitted in the CRB's office for kind perusal of the then CRB Shri V.K. Yadav. Kindly let me know whether these papers were put up to the review committee members who compulsorily retired me on 03.12.2019 by 2 to 18
42) The data on the number of disabled employees working in the Indian Railways. The data should be separately provided each class of employee i.e. Group A, Group B, Group C & Group D. Further breakup for each class of employee should be shown as per the specified disability mention in the schedule of the RPWD Act, 2016.
43) Para No 29 of the written statement as submitted by the respondents in the OA No 323 of 2021 as filed by me in CAT Mumbai states "... Medical Board was formed consisting of 4 members (Dr. Sushma Matey, MD, Medicine, Dr. Memuna Bhadhur, Ophthalmologist, Dr. Rajkumar, Surgeon and Dr. Samanthray, Psychiatrist) on 10.12.2018. Kindly provide me the documents based on which this statement was made by the respondents
44) The section 3(2) and section 3(5) of the chapter II on RIGHTS AND ENTITLEMENT of the PWD in the RPWD Act 2016 may kindly be perused Page 8 of 15 to provide the list of necessary steps as taken by the Railways in compliance to above sections of the Act.
45) kindly refer to the letter dated 25.04.2004 by the then DRM Shri Manoj Kumar which is self-explanatory. Under what circumstances a need was feit to obtain a letter of the above kind for substantiation of the entries made by him in my ACR for the year 2002-03. Kindly provide me the provisions as laid down in the brochure on confidential records issued by RB as per which the act to have a letter written by the DRM Shri Manoj Kumar is not uncalled for or is justified.
46) Last five years APARS were perused by the Review committee at RB before compulsorily retiring me from the Railway Service on 03.12.2019 on the occasion of observation of International Disability Day. Since the APAR for the year 2017-18 was intentionally not made available to the review committee members, it had to than rely on my APAR for the year 2012-13 in lieu of the 2017-18 APAR. It is the APAR of the year 2012-13 which carried the information that I am mentally not sound and remain depressed all the time. This information was enough for the review committee to decide my case of compulsory retirement duly invoking the section 20(4) of the RPwD Act 2016.Surprisingly the committee had two stalwart in it, Member Staff Shri Manoj Pandey who cannot claim ignorance of the RPWD Act, not only being a personnel officer on Indian Railway but also heading the personnel department of the Indian Railways and CRB Shri V.K. Yadav an ex-officio member to the Central Advisory Board on Disability and was heading the entire Indian Railways. Still Central Railway was duty bound to inform the RB about my medical condition. Kindly provide me a copy of the communique that reveals CR had intimated about my psychiatric illness to RB before the compulsory retirement which was then overlooked by the committee members.
47) For regular promotion from senior scale to JAG (Junior Administrative Grade), one has to undergo a mandatory course at the Railway Staff College (NAIR) Vadodara. Kindly let me know the year and batch of the training course in the Railway Staff College when I was imparted this training.
48) For the adverse entries recorded in my ACR (Annual confidential record) in the years 1999-2000 and 2001-02 I had submitted my representation to the Railway Administration (PCME). Kindly arrange to provide the copies of representation I submitted then to the Railway Administration for expunging the adverse remarks.
Page 9 of 1549) For the adverse entries made in my ACR in the year 2002-03, my representation for necessary expunction was duly considered by the competent authority and they were expunged subsequently. Kindly provide me a copy of the letter which was issued to me to the above affect (of expunction). Also provide me a copy of the rule under which it mandatory on the part of the railway administration to communicate to the applicant about the decision arrived at by the administration on his representation.
50) Adverse entries in my APAR for the year 2007-08 was communicated to me by providing its entire copy, date of communication being 17.01.2011. I made a representation for reconsideration and expunction of the adverse remarks to the competent authority. In this connection kindly provide me a copy of the decision of the competent authority on my representation.
51) In what capacity does CRB works for the govt of India? He is also acting as ex officio member to the central advisory board on disability. While considering my representation dated 27.12.2019 on my compulsory retirement order dated 03.12.2019, he and the other members of the representation committee categorically mention that a lunatic person is unfit for working in the Railway system, and the representation being devoid of merit cannot be considered for my re- instatement in the Railway service. Kindly provide the relevant duty and responsibility as specified for him (CRB) in the RPwD Act, 2016 as per which this statement is justified and is not akin to abuse of power.
52) Is the Accounts department maintaining a separate personal file for all class I gazetted officers on the Indian Railways? This besides the personal file being maintained by the personnel department. If so kindly provide me a copy of its contents to me.
53) The final grading in an APAR is a reflection of the (English collocation) overall performance of which most important is completion of all the given targets with excellent knowledge of functions. Kindly provide me a copy of the relevant guidelines as applicable to a railway officer whereby completion of the given targets matters the least towards achievement of the organizational goals and what outweighs everything is the officers' attributes which if rated average goes to make the overall grading as Average.
Page 10 of 1554) In Railway working powers are well delegated for officers working in different grades. When it comes to transfer of a JAG or SG officer within a zone, the power vests with the departmental head who with the approval of GM (General Manager) of the zone can transfer the officer. The reasoned speaking order that follows from the departmental head, in view of the court adjudication, when the transfer order (within a zone) is challenged in the court of law too must be with the due knowledge i.e. with approval of the head of the zone or the GM. Kindly provide me a copy of the provision whereby GM's approval in such a case is not required before issue of the speaking order or the GM can simply be bypassed.
55) At zonal level, kindly provide me the constitution of the screening committee for mechanical department who can undertake the screening of mechanical officers for compulsory retirement under the FR 56(j and also emphasising the total number of the members in the said committee l.e. two or three members."
2. The PIOs of different divisions had given replies to the Appellant vide their letters dated 10.12.2024, 20.11.2024, 07.01.2025, 22.10.2025, 21.10.2025, 24.10.2025, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 17.02.2025. The FAA order is not on record.
3. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Present through Video-Conference.
Respondent: Shri Dipak Kumar Biswas, Joint Director (PG) & CPIO (Coord.), Shri Sandeep Kumar, Inspector/CCMC and Shri R P Joshi, Director and Shri Anil Kumar, Under Secretary present in person.
Shri Soumitra Paul, Under Secretary; Shri Amit Singh Mehra, Director (Manpower & Planning) & CPIO; Shri Mukesh Kumar Sinha, Deputy Director, Railway Board; Dr. Kapil Sarde, Sr. DMO & CPIO; Shri Rohit Kumar Verma, Section Officer; Shri E R Meena, Director (Health) & CPIO; Shri Sushil Kumar Singh, Director & CPIO and Shri Vikram Singh, Section Officer, all present through Video-Conference.Page 11 of 15
4. Proof of having served a copy of Second Appeal on Respondents while filing the same in CIC on 01.04.2025 is not available on record. Respondents confirm non-service.
5. Written submissions of the Respondents are taken on record.
6. The Appellant, during the hearing, reiterated the contents of his RTI application and instant appeal and submitted that till date complete and correct information has not been provided to him by the Respondent. He stated that complete information should be provided to him.
7. During the hearing, the Commission asked the Appellant to limit his query to a few most important points, as the information sought by him is voluminous in nature. The Appellant refused to shortlist most important points.
8. The Respondents while defending their case inter alia submitted that the Appellant had sought information on 55 points which does not pertain to a single division/department/PIO. The information sought by the Appellant is voluminous in nature and is scattered in multiple files. As per section 7 (9) of RTI Act, 2005, information shall ordinarily be provided in the form in which it is sought unless it disproportionately diverts the resources of the Public Authority. Nonetheless, efforts were made to deal with the RTI application of the Appellant and the same was transferred to different PIOs as per their locus. All the PIOs to whom the RTI application was forwarded have given replies to the Appellant, which is mentioned below:
"Point Nos. 18, 23, 41, 46, 13, 51 and 20 replied on 22.10.2025; Point Nos. 32, 9, 35, 32 and 48 replied on 24.10.2025; Point No. 6 replied on 10.12.2024;
Point Nos. 14 and 31 replied on 20.11.2024 Point Nos. 2, 3, 7, 11, 15, 16, 21, 22, 24, 28, 37, 38, 50 and 53 replied on 07.01.2025 Point No. 47 replied on 21.10.2025"
Decision:
Page 12 of 159. The Commission upon a perusal of records observes that the main premise of instant appeal was non-furnishing of complete information by the PIOs. The Commission observes that point-wise reply/information in the matter has been provided to the Appellant vide letters dated 10.12.2024, 20.11.2024, 07.01.2025, 22.10.2025, 21.10.2025, 24.10.2025.
10. The Commission further observes that the information sought by the Appellant in his RTI application is indeterminate and also appears to be voluminous in nature, as he has sought information on 55 points and collation and compilation of which would entail diversion of manpower resources of the Public Authority and thus, cannot be provided in view of Section 7(9) of RTI Act. The same can be garnered from the relevant provisions of Section 7(9) of RTI Act which is reproduced below for ready reference -
"...7. Disposal of request.--
xxx (9) An information shall ordinarily be provided in the form in which it is sought unless it would disproportionately divert the resources of the public authority or would be detrimental to the safety or preservation of the record in question..."
11. It also appears that the Appellant has grossly misconceived the idea of exercising his Right to Information as being absolute and unconditional. It is rather unfortunate that even the best of intentions has to not only stand the test of procedural requirements and fetters laid down in the RTI Act but also stand the test of practicality, a notion well recognised by superior Courts through various judgments such as the Hon'ble Supreme Court's observation in Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) & Anr. v. Aditya Bandhopadhyay and others [(2011) 8 SCC 497] stating that:
"37. xxxxx The Act should not be allowed to be misused or abused, to become a tool to obstruct the national development and integration, or to destroy the peace, tranquility and harmony among its citizens. Nor should it be converted into a tool of oppression or intimidation of Page 13 of 15 honest officials striving to do their duty. The nation does not want a scenario where 75% of the staff of public authorities spends 75% of their time in collecting and furnishing information to applicants instead of discharging their regular duties. The threat of penalties under the RTI Act and the pressure of the authorities under the RTI Act should not lead to employees of a public authorities prioritising 'information furnishing', at the cost of their normal and regular duties."(Emphasis Supplied)......."
12. Nonetheless, the PIOs vide their letters dated 10.12.2024, 20.11.2024, 07.01.2025, 22.10.2025, 21.10.2025, 24.10.2025 had made efforts and tried to give reply/information to the Appellant on maximum points of his RTI application.
13. Further, the issue raised by the Appellant during the hearing challenging the veracity of information furnished by the PIOs is purely a matter of grievance which is outside the mandate of RTI Act. In this regard, the Appellant is advised about the powers of the Commission under the RTI Act by relying on certain precedents of the superior Courts as under:
14. The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the matter of Hansi Rawat and Anr.
v. Punjab National Bank and Ors. (LPA No.785/2012) dated 11.01.2013 has held as under:
"6. ....proceedings under the RTI Act cannot be converted into proceedings for adjudication of disputes as to the correctness of the information furnished."(Emphasis Supplied)
15. The aforesaid rationale finds resonance in another judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the matter of Govt. of NCT of Delhi vs. Rajender Prasad (W.P.[C] 10676/2016) dated 30.11.2017 wherein it was held as under:
"6. The CIC has been constituted under Section 12 of the Act and the powers of CIC are delineated under the Act. The CIC being a statutory body has to act strictly within the confines of the Act and is neither required to nor has the jurisdiction to examine any other controversy or disputes."Page 14 of 15
16. While the Apex Court in the matter of Union of India vs Namit Sharma (Review Petition [C] No.2309 of 2012) dated 03.09.2013 observed as under:
"20. ...While deciding whether a citizen should or should not get a particular information "which is held by or under the control of any public authority", the Information Commission does not decide a dispute between two or more parties concerning their legal rights other than their right to get information in possession of a public authority...."
(Emphasis Supplied)
17. In this regard, the Commission finds no infirmity in the reply and as a sequel to it further clarifications tendered by the PIOs during hearing as the same was found to be in consonance with the provisions of RTI Act.
18. No intervention of the Commission is warranted in the matter.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Vinod Kumar Tiwari (िवनोद कुमार ितवारी) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स!ािपत ित) (S. Anantharaman) Dy. Registrar 011- 26181927 Date Copy To:
RAILWAY BOARD, RAIL BAHWAN, NEW DELHI - 110001 Page 15 of 15 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)