Details of penalty imposed against a railway contractor for poor quality of food, name of the officer responsible to supervise the contractors sought - Respondent: penalty of Rs. 5000/- against the catering service provider - CIC: no action required
27 Mar, 2014Appellant filed a complaint with the Railways regarding the poor quality of food served by train caterers - He sought information regarding the details of penalty imposed against a contractor, copies of penalty order, deposit receipts, warning letter, name of the officer who was responsible to supervise the contractors - Respondent: a penalty of Rs. 5000/- against the catering service provider - CIC: no further action required
ORDER
Facts
1. The appellant filed an application dated 17.07.2012 under the RTI Act seeking information regarding the details of penalty imposed against a contractor, copies of penalty order, deposit receipts, warning letter, name of the officer who was responsible to supervise the contractors. CPIO responded on 21.08.2012. Copy of the first appeal is not enclosed. FAA vide order dated 05.09.2012 upheld the decision of the CPIO. Appellant filed this present second appeal on 24.09.2012.
Hearing
2. Respondent participated in the hearing through video conferencing.
3. Respondent referred to the RTI application of the appellant and stated the appellant filed a complaint with the Railways regarding the poor quality of food served by train caterers. Respondent stated that after receipt of the complaint the Railways issued show cause notice against the catering service provider. Respondent stated that though a reply was submitted by the catering service provider to the show cause notice, the Railways imposed a penalty of Rs. 5000/- against the catering service provider.
4. Respondent stated that they had taken prompt steps in maintaining the good quality of food to be served in the trains. Respondent stated that information pertaining to the RTI application had already been provided to the appellant on 21.08.2012.
5. Respondent stated that no further information was to be provided to the appellant.
6. Appellant did not participate in the hearing.
7. Respondent has acted in conformity with the RTI Act.
Decision
8. No further action is required to be taken in the matter at the level of the Commission. The appeal is disposed of. Copy of decision be given free of cost to the parties.
(Vijai Sharma)
Information Commissioner
Citation: Shri B D Verma Sewa v. Western Railway in Decision No.CIC/AD/A/2012/003249/VS/06215