In the Central Information Commission
at
New Delhi
File No: CIC/AD/A/2011/000268
Date of Hearing : March 14, 2011
Date of Decision : March 14, 2011
Parties:
Applicant
Shri Mohan Lal Purohit
17 E / 450
Chaupsani Housing Board
Jodhpur
Rajasthan
The Applicant was present during the hearing.
Respondents
North Western Railway
Divisional Railway Manager's Office
Bikaner Division
Bikaner
Represented by : Shri S.R.Meena, APIO & ADEE
Shri L.R.Meena, Sr.DPO
Shri V.K.Sharma, CPI
Information Commissioner : Mrs. Annapurna Dixit
___________________________________________________________________
Decision Notice
The Commission noted that the objective of the RTI application has been achieved and that the Appellant has
been given his additional increment. Even so, in the interest of the Appellant the PIO is directed to provide
file notings/communications based on which the advance increment to the Appellant was approved, to the
Appellant so that the Appellant can satisfy himself as to how the decision was arrived at for providing
additional increment to him and also why there was such a delay.
In the Central Information Commission
at
New Delhi
File No: CIC/AD/A/2011/000268
ORDER
Background
1. The Applicant filed an RTI application dt.28.6.10 with the PIO, DRM Office, North Western Railway,
Bikaner. He stated that in April 1995, three employees of Bikaner Division including himself had
appeared for Part B of Civil Engg. Exam and were declare successful and that as a form of
encouragement they were given an advance increment. However, the same was not extended to
him while it was provided to the other two. In this context, he wanted to know the rules by which
additional increment was given to the other two employees as also the rules based on which he was
denied the increment even after being declared as successful. The PIO replied on 30.8.10 informing
him that reply has already been furnished on 21.7.10, while enclosing a copy of the reply. The
Applicant filed an appeal dt.8.9.10 with the Appellate Authority stating that information has not been
not received by him till date. The PIO on the directions of the Appellate Authority replied on 19.10.10
enclosing the desired information from the concerned department. Being aggrieved with the reply,
the Applicant filed a second appeal dt.18.11.10 before CIC.
Decision
2. During the hearing, the Respondent submitted that the Appellant’s grievance has been redressed
since after reviewing the facts and circumstances, the Appellant has been given an additional
increment. The Appellant however, complained at this stage about the delay in giving him the
increment.
3. The Commission noted that the objective of the RTI application has been achieved and that the
Appellant has been given his additional increment. Even so, in the interest of the Appellant the PIO
is directed to provide file notings/communications based on which the advance increment to the
Appellant was approved, to the Appellant so that the Appellant can satisfy himself as to how the
decision was arrived at for providing additional increment to him and also why there was such a
delay. The information should reach the Appellant by 14.4.11 and the Appellant to submit a
compliance report to the Commission by 21.4.11.
4. The appeal is disposed of with the above directions.
(Annapurna Dixit)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy
(G.Subramanian)
Deputy Registrar
Cc:
1. Shri Mohan Lal Purohit
17 E / 450
Chaupsani Housing Board
Jodhpur
Rajasthan
2. The Public Information Officer
North Western Railway
Divisional Railway Manager’s Office
Bikaner Division
Bikaner
3. The Appellate Authority
North Western Railway
Divisional Railway Manager’s Office
Bikaner Division
Bikaner
4. Officer Incharge, NIC