Action taken against the RPF staff for misbehavior with substitute labourers
The appellant had registered a complaint related to misbehavior of the RPF staff with the substitute labourers in Sonpur Division East Central Railway. Later, he filed an application under the Right to Information (RTI) Act with the Railway Board seeking information on the action taken on his complaint and the name of the officer who is expected to take action against his complaint. The Public Information Officer (PIO) transferred the RTI Application to the PIO East Central Railway Hajipur. The application was further transferred to the PIO, Personnel Officer Sonpur for taking appropriate action. Meanwhile the applicant filed his first appeal. The First Appellate Authority (FAA) informed the appellant that a reply has already been sent in this regard by the PIO. He enclosed the copy of this letter for the perusal of the appellant.
During the hearing before the Central Information Commission (CIC), the appellant complained about the delay that has occurred in enquiring into his allegations. The respondent stated that information as available at that time was provided to the appellant by the PIO under his covering letter. Explaining reasons for the delay in enquiring into the appellant’s complaint, the PIO stated that the Investigating Officer who was appointed at first had left half way without completing the enquiry and that they had then appointed another investigating officer. The current investigating officer submitted that he had completed the enquiry and as per the enquiry report the allegations leveled by the appellant against the RPF could not be substantiated.
View of CIC
The Commission directed the Senior DPO to provide a copy of the enquiry report to the appellant after severing the information under section 10(1) Where a request for access to information is rejected on the ground that it is in relation to information which is exempt from disclosure, then, notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, access may be provided to that part of the record which does not contain any information which is exempt from disclosure under this Act and which can reasonably be severed from any part that contains exempt information. of the RTI Act if it is exempted from disclosure under section 8(1).
Citation: Mr. Ramashray Sah v. East Central Railway Divisional Railway Manager’s Office in File No: CIC/AD/A/2012/002305
RTI Citation : RTIFI/2013/CIC/920
Click here to view original RTI order of Court / Information Commission