Central Information Commission Judgements

Mr. Uma Shankar Singh vs East Central Railway on 16 June, 2009

Central Information Commission
Mr. Uma Shankar Singh vs East Central Railway on 16 June, 2009
                 CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                     Club Building, Old JNU Campus,
                         Opposite Ber Sarai, New Delhi -110067
                                 Tel: + 91 11 26161796

                                               Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2009/001092/3715
                                                      Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2009/001092

Relevant Facts

emerging from the Appeal:

Appellant : Mr. Uma Shankar Singh
House No. 506, Central Colony,
Mughalsarai,
Dist. – Chandauli
Uttarpradesh – 232101.

Respondent : Mr. Rajesh Kumar
Dy. Chief Personnel Officer/ PIO
East Central Railway,
Office of the General Manager/Personnel
Hajipur, Bihar.


RTI application filed on             :       01/01/2008
PIO replied                          :       05/02/2008
First appeal filed on                :       25/02/2008
First Appellate Authority order      :       26/05/2008
Second Appeal received on            :       22/12/2008

Information sought:

The appellant in his RTI in his application sought information regarding action taken on the
letter addressed to General Manager (P) East central Railway, Hajipur by Chief Personnel
Officer of East Railway with respect to the transfer of Mr. Satanand from East Railway,
Jamalpur to Plant Depot, Mughalsarai, East Central Railway.

The PIO’s Reply:

The PIO replied to the appellant that:

1) A letter for inter railway transfer of Mr. Sadanand (Tech.III)
Jamalpur/Workshop/East Railway has been received.

2) Certified copy of original application of Inter railway transfer, Service Register and
Leave Account of Mr. Sadanand was not enclosed with the received letter.

3) His name has been entered on serial number 73 in Transfer Register and action will
be taken on appropriate time.

The First Appellant Authority’s Order:
Not Mentioned.

Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Appellant: Absent
Respondent: Mr. Rajesh Kumar
The PIO shows that the entire information sought by the appellant has been provided. It
appears to be correct.

Decision:

The appeal is dismissed
The information has been provided.

This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.

Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
16 June 2009
(In any correspondence on this decision, mentioned the complete decision number.)
(GJ)