In the Central Information Commission
at
New Delhi
File No: CIC/AD/A/2010/001740
Date of Hearing : January 17, 2011
Date of Decision : January 17, 2011
Parties:
Applicant
Shri I.S.Ravi
H.No.H320 A
Railway Harthala Colony
Moradabad 244 001
The Applicant was present during the hearing.
Respondents
Northern Railway
Divisional Railway Manager's Office
Moradabad Division
Moradabad
Represented by : Shri Govind Prasad, PIO, Shri S.U.Siddiqui, ACM, Shri Moher singh Meena, OS,
Shri A.K.Bhatnagar, Head Clerk and Shri Anil Kumar.
Information Commissioner : Mrs. Annapurna Dixit
___________________________________________________________________
Decision Notice
As given in the decision
In the Central Information Commission
at
New Delhi
File No: CIC/AD/A/2010/001740
ORDER
Background
1. The Applicant filed an RTI application dt.8.5.10 with the PIO, DRM Office, Northern Railway,
Moradabad seeking information against 4 points. He stated that he was working as CIT in
Moradabad and that on 14.12.09 in connection with his duty in train No.5610, he was wrongly
punished. He wanted to know the rule which gives the time period within which he is expected to file
his representation in response to the complaint filed by the passenger. He also sought other details
such as officials responsible for indicating the reserved coaches, facilities available for senior citizens
and sought copies of various other rules. The PIO replied on 7.6.10 providing information against
points 1 and 4. Not satisfied with the reply, the Applicant filed an appeal dt.1.7.10 with the Appellate
Authority commenting on the information provided and seeking the missing information. The DPO
vide his letter dt.30.6.10 conveyed the decision of the Appellate Authority who upheld the order of the
PIO. Being aggrieved with the reply, the Applicant filed a second appeal dt.9.9.10 before CIC.
Decision
2. During the hearing, the Respondents submitted that with regard to point 1, there is no separate rule
indicating the time period within which a response to a complaint needs to be furnished to the office
by the CIT , Whatever information is available with the Public Authority is contained in the list of
duties to be performed by the official. With regard to point 4, the Appellant sought the rule by which
he has to take the telephone No. of the passengers by force on the complaint form and the action the
CIT can take against passengers who refuse to provide this information on the form. The
Respondents submitted that there is no separate rule and that the complaint form itself contains all
the conditions to be fulfilled while filling up the complaint form.
3. The Commission after hearing the submission directs the PIO to provide the list of duties indicating
the information sought against point 1 and also to provide the information against point 2 to the
Appellant by 20.2.11 and the Appellant to submit a compliance report to the Commission by
25.2.11. The Appellant may also be informed about the non availability of rule sought in point 4 of the
RTI application.
4. The appeal is disposed of with the above directions.
(Annapurna Dixit)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy
(G.Subramanian)
Deputy Registrar
Cc:
1. Shri I.S.Ravi
H.No.H320 A
Railway Harthala Colony
Moradabad 244 001
2. The Public Information Officer
Northern Railway
Divisional Railway Manager’s Office
Moradabad Division
Moradabad
3. The Appellate Authority
Northern Railway
Divisional Railway Manager’s Office
Moradabad Division
Moradabad
4. Officer Incharge, NIC