Central Information Commission
*****
No.CIC/OK/C/2008/00238
Dated: 02 January 2009
Name of the Appellant : Shri Bhoyar K.L.
Res# 004 B 1 Mehar Nagar
Near Shri Complex PH-II
Adharwadi Kalyan (W), Thane,
Name of the Public Authority : CST Mumbai
Background:
Shri Bhoyar filed an RTI-application with the Public Information Officer,
CST Mumbai, on 12 October 2007 seeking information/documents relating to
action taken by the Railway Department on a trap laid by the Central Bureau of
Investigation/Anti Corruption Branch on the Complainant.
2. Not getting any reply from the PIO, the Applicant approached the Central
Information Commission with a complaint on 18 December 2007.
3. The Bench of Dr. O.P. Kejariwal, Information Commissioner, heard the
matter on 19 December 2008.
4. The Commission vide its Order No. CIC/OK/C/2008/2008 dated 29
September 2008 directed the PIO to supply the information to the Applicant by
20 October 2008 and directed the PIO to appear before the Commission on 24
October 2008. However, the said appearance was postponed to 19 December
2008.
5. Shri Kamal Jain, Sr. DCM & PIO, represented the Respondents.
6. The Complainant, Shri Bhoyar, was neither present nor send any
representative for the hearing.
Decision:
7. In the absence of the Appellant, the Commission heard the Respondents
and noted that the RTI-application of the Appellant dealt with a CBI enquiry
going on against him. In response to the application, the Respondents applied
Sections 8(1)(g), (h) & (j) of the RTI-Act to deny the information. On
examination of the case, the Commission felt that although Section 8(1)(g) and
8(1)(j) were not applicable to the case, Section 8(1)(h) under which an
information could be denied which would impede the process of investigation or
apprehension or prosecution of offenders was applicable. While accepting the
submission of the Respondents, the Commission directs them to ensure in future
that when they apply a Section/Clause of the RTI-Act to dismiss a case, the
Order must be a speaking one and not couched in generalities. The Commission
also noted that while the Respondents had replied to the RTI-application, the
Applicant had not filed his First Appeal. He is now directed to do so in case he
feels that the decision of the PIO was not proper. He may do this by 5 February
2009 after which the case may be treated as finally closed.
8. The case is thus disposed of.
(O.P. Kejariwal)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy:
(G. Subramanian)
Assistant Registrar
Cc:
1. Shri Bhoyar K.L., Res# 004 B 1 Mehar Nagar, Near Shri Complex PH-II,
Adharwadi Kalyan (W), Thane,
2. The Public Information Officer, Central Railway, Divisional Railway
Manager’s Office, Commercial Branch, CST, Mumbai
3. Officer Incharge, NIC
4. Press E Group, CIC