Central Information Commission
CIC/AD/A/2010/000824
Dated: September 22, 2010
Name of the Applicant : Shri S.M. Uge
Name of the Public Authority : South East Central Railway, Raipur
Background
1. The RTI application was filed by the Applicant on 30.12.09 with the PIO, South East Central Railway,
Raipur referring to one year extension given to one Smt. Sarita R. Kamdi. He wanted to know the
norms under Estt. Rules for such extension when it appears to affect adversely the interest of regular
Senior Health Inspectors who are already in the queue for getting transferred/posted or promoted. He
wanted certified copies of the relevant rules along with copies of file notings put up in this
connection for such extension. He also referred to transfer on own request of Shri Ashish Aldok,
Health Inspector at Raigarh , the criteria taken into consideration for flouting the Rules & regulations
as detailed in Estt. Serial No.114/07 and 152/08 dealing with staff transfers, and also wanted details
of note sheet etc. and certified copies thereof put up in connection with the above transfer. He also
referred to the retirement of Shri J.S. Humane in the year 2006 and the post still lying vacant. He
wanted to know the reasons for not filling up the above post and sought certified copies of the
relevant office orders and note sheets put up in this connection. The PIO replied on 13.1.10 stating
that their office had dealt with only Kr. Sarita Kamdi. Hnce the requisite information may be collected
from the office of CPO/BSP. Being aggrieved with this reply, the Applicant filed his first appeal on
24.2.10 stating that it is the PIO’s responsibility to collect the information and provide it to him. He
also stated that in this case the SDPO, Raipur has given the reply in his official capacity and not in
the capacity of the PIO of the Public Authority. On not receiving any reply from the Appellate
Authority the Appellant filed the second appeal before the Commission on 5.4.10 for necessary
action.
2. The Bench of Mrs. Annapurna Dixit, Information Commissioner, scheduled the hearing for September
22, 2010.
3. Shri Prakash Kumar, Appellate Authority, Shri G.M.S. Naidu, PIO, Raipur & Shri Manish Avasthi,
PIO, Bilaspur represented the Public Authority and were heard through video conferencing.
4. The Applicant was not present during the hearing.
Decision
5. During the hearing the PIO stated that the RTI application was transferred to PIO Bilaspur Division
and that information against points 1 & 2 was provided on 19.4.10.
6. On perusal of the submissions on record and after hearing the Respondent, it was noted that the
Appellant had received the information after he filed the second appeal and since there is no further
communication from the Appellant after receiving the information, it is assumed that he is satisfied with the
same.
7. The PIO Bilaspur Division is directed to showcause as to why a penalty should not be imposed upon
him for not furnishing the information within the mandatory period. The response to this notice to reach the
Commission by 25 October, 2010.
8. The appeal is accordingly disposed of.
(Annapurna Dixit)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy
(G.Subramanian)
Deputy Registrar
Cc:
1. Shri S.M. Uge
Chief Health Inspector
Railway Quarter No.74/2
South East Central Railway Colony
Durg (C.G.)
2. The PIO
South East Central Railway
Divisional Railway manager’s Office
Personnel Division
Raipur
3. The Appellate Authority
South East Central Railway
Divisional Railway manager’s Office
Personnel Division
Raipur
4. The PIO
South East Central Railway
O/o the Divisional Security Commissioner
Bilaspur Division
Bilaspur
5. Officer Incharge, NIC