CIC: The first appeal should have been replied to within the time period stipulated u/s 19 - Appellant: Larger public interest is being served with the disclosure of documents to prove the level of absence & cheating amongst the employees of Coal factory
Date of Decision : 20/12/2016
O R D E R
The appellant, by way of his RTI application sought information regarding copy of list of passengers travelling in 3 tier/sleeper class and AC, from Lucknow to Shaktinagar in train no. 14370 (Triveni Express) on 24/05/2014, copy of log book/record indicating arrival time of the train at Anapara and matters related thereto. The CPIO, Northern Railway vide its letter dated 08.08.2014, provided a response to the appellant requesting him to deposit a fee for the documents. Dissatisfied by the response of the CPIO, the appellant approached the FAA. However, the order of the FAA, if any, is not available in the record of the Commission.
Facts emerging during the hearing:
The following were present: Appellant: Mr. Sudhir Kumar (M. 9406711129) through VC; Respondent: Ms. Upasna Paul, Dy. CCM (Co-ord) (M. 9717630960) and Mr. Mahesh Kumar, COS (M. 9717638943), Mr. Ratan Rakesh Lakra, APO (M. 9771426603), through VC;
The appellant re-iterated the contents of his RTI application and stated that satisfactory information was not provided to him. The respondent, Delhi stated that the RTI application was transferred to East Central Railway, Dhanbad since the information sought pertained to them. It was explained that a fee of Rs. 4 per page was wrongly charged by Dhanbad Division whereas the prevalent rates were more than Rs. 500/- per PNR. The respondent, Dhanbad submitted that the information was provided to the appellant on 08.08.2014, wherein a fee of Rs. 4 per copy was sought to be deposited by him. It was informed that the first appeal was not responded to. The Commission observed that the first appeal should have been replied to within the stipulated time period in accordance with the time frame stipulated under Section 19 of the RTI Act, 2005. On a query from the Commission regarding the larger public interest being served with the disclosure of information, the appellant stated that the documents were required to prove the level of absence and cheating amongst the employees of the Coal factory where he was employed.
Considering the facts of the case and the submissions made by both the parties, the Commission instructs the respondent, Dhanbad to provide information to the appellant in accordance with the provisions in the RTI Act, 2005 and Rules framed there under within a period of 10 days from the date of receipt of this order. The appeal stands disposed with the above direction.
Citation : Mr. Sudhir Kumar v. CPIO, Northern railway in Appeal No.:-CIC/VS/A/2014/003403/BJ