Central Information Commission
CIC/SG/A/2009/001282-AD
Dated January 8, 2010
Name of the Applicant : Shri S.K.Nagarwal
Name of the Public Authority : NW Railway, Jaipur
Background
1. The Applicant filed an RTI application dt.8.8.08 with the PIO, NWR, HQ, Jaipur. He
stated that in reply to his RTI application, the PIO vide letter dt.11.1.08 has provided
him list of standard query possible in the VSS. In this connection, he sought copy of
printouts of each of the standard queries for data of complete NWR vigilance
department database, copy of report of standard query of S.Nos.4,9,10,13 & copy of
case progress report for case No.Vig.2005/12/159/P/V4/C/JP and also answers to
several other miscellaneous questions. Shri Rajeev Singh, PIO replied on 4.9.08
denying the information u/s 8(1)(j) against points 1 to 4 and stating that CIC vide its
decision in case No.CIC/AT/A/2006/00465 dt.29.12.06 has also upheld the exemption
of such disclosure. He also denied information against point 5 u/s 8(1)(j) while relying
on the decision in case No.CIC/AT/A/2007/00229 dt.14.5.07. With regard to para 8,
he stated that information consists of approximately 1400 pages and copies can be
provided after invoking section 10(1) of the RTI Act . Not satisfied with the reply, the
Applicant filed an appeal dt.6.10.08 with the Appellate Authority reiterating his request
for information and also wondering how the Section 8(1)(e), (h) and (j) of the RTI Act
apply for receipt/dispatch register as these are simple records of movement of file.
Shri Rajeev Singh, PIO replied on 6.11.08 stating that the first appeal cannot be put
up to the Appellate Authority because the language used in the appeal is highly
inappropriate and returned the first appeal with a request to submit the appeal in a
little more civilized manner. The Applicant then replied on 24.11.08 to the PIO asking
him under what provisions of RTI Act, he can interrupt an appeal addressed to the
Appellate Authority and under what provisions he has the authority to decide whether
or not to put up the appeal to the Appellate Authority.
The Applicant filed a second appeal dt.26.12.08 before CIC reiterating the grounds
mentioned in his first appeal dt.6.10.08.
2. The Bench of Mrs. Annapurna Dixit, Information Commissioner, scheduled the hearing
for January 8, 2010.
3. Shri Rajeev Singh, PIO, Shri Suresh Chandra, Dy.CVO, Shri J.N.Meena, APO and Shri
M.K.Sharma, APIO represented the Public Authority.
4. The Appellant was present along with Shri M.K.Tyagi during the hearing.
Decision
5. The Respondents submitted that NW railway was carved out in 2002 and there are
around 2000 cases where 1200-1500 are live cases and to provide the information as
sought by the applicant, which is voluminous will disproportionately divert the
resources of the Public Authority and moreover it is also difficult to apply section 10(1)
for each and every query. The Applicant then agreed to be satisfied with information
provided for the last 3 years.
6. After hearing the submissions made, the Commission directs the PIO to provide
complete information sought by the applicant for the last 3 years after applying
Section 10(1) of the RTI Act to sever any part of the information which is exempt from
disclosure under Section 8(1). The information should reach the Appellant by
8.2.2010.
7. The Commission warns the PIO that the first appeal has to be disposed off by the
Appellate Authority and that the PIO taking decisions is not acceptable. Even if the
first appeal is abusive, it is only for the Appellate Authority to this point out to the
Appellant.
9. The appeal is accordingly disposed of.
(Annapurna Dixit)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy:
(G.Subramanian)
Deputy Registrar
Cc:
1. Shri S.K.Nagarwal
51, Sitaram Colony
Ramnagar
Sodala
Jaipur 302 019
2. The PIO
North Western Railway
Headquarter Office
Hasanpura Road
Jaipur
3. The Appellate Authority
North Western Railway
Headquarter Office
Hasanpura Road
Jaipur
4. Officer incharge, NIC
5. Press E Group, CIC