Central Information Commission
CIC/AD/A/2010/000140
Dated April 19, 2010
Name of the Appellant : Mr. Anant Kumar
Name of the Public Authority : C.L.W. Chittaranjan
Background
1. The Applicant filed his RTI Request on 03.10.2009, with the PIO C.L.W, Chittranjan seeking
information against 4 points in pursuance of the order dated 19.06.2009 passed by the Central
Administrative Tribunal, Kolkatta. The Applicant wanted to know whether any decision has been
taken or not on his representation, and the photo copy of the entire file which dealt with his
representation. He also wanted details including complete address with the Posts held by each
Officer who was supposed to implement the order dated 19.06.2009. The PIO sent an interim reply
on 16.10.2009 stating that they had transferred his application to the SPO/A & APIO/Personnel for
furnishing the requisite information. Not satisfied with the response, the Applicant filed his first appeal
on 30.10.09 seeking proof that the appeal in the court was filed on 17.9.09. The Appellate Authority
replied on 21.11.2009 stating that the points raised in the appeal are wrong while enclosing letter
dated 19 11 09 giving the status of the case pending in the High Court, Kolkatta. Still not satisfied,
the Applicant filed his Second Appeal before the Commission on 08.12.2009 complaining that the
C.L.W Administration had not filed the appeal in the Court on 17.09.2009 as claimed by them and
had done so only on 23.09.2009.
2. The Bench of Mrs. Annapurna Dixit, Information Commissioner, scheduled the hearing for April 19,
2010.
3. Mr. Amiya Prasad Dey, Dy. CPO, Mr. Jyoti Kumar, CPO, A.K. Sinha, CLA represented the Public
Authority.
4. The Appellant was not present during the hearing.
Decision
5. The Respondent submitted that the Appellant had appeared for a test to be included in the training
under the Apprentice Act and that he did not qualify for filling the vacancy for training under the
Physically Handicapped Quota. He had approaches the CAT in this connection , who directed the
Public Authority to reserve a place for training of the Appellant under the reservation quota, if
possible. The Public Authority however appealed against this decision in the High Court. The
Respondent also submitted that the date of filing the appeal in the Court by the Public Authority was
given to the Appellant as 17.09.2009 on the basis of a reply dated 15.09.2009 provided by the
Advocate, High Court, Kolkatta and that there was no malafide denial of correct information when
they mentioned this date in the RTI application. Furthermore, the Respondent also produced before
the Commission a letter dated 16.04.2010 from the Advocate, High Court Kolkatta in which the
Advocate had stated that both parties were directed to file Affidavits, in opposition and in reply and
that the detailed order will be available later. The Commission while noting that all information has
been provided to the Appellant also directs the PIO to provide an attested copy of the letter
mentioned hereinabove, dated 16.04.2010 from the Advocate Mr. Uday Shankar Bhattacharya, High
Court, Kolkatta, to the Appellant by 15.05.2010.
(Annapurna Dixit)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy:
(G. Subramanian)
Deputy Registrar
Cc:
1. Mr. Anant Kumar,
S/o Shri Alakh Deo Singh,
Shanti Nagar, Mihijam,
P.B. Road, PO & PS Mihijam,
Jamtara 815354
Jharkhand
2. The Public Information Officer,
Chittranjan Locomotive Works,
Chittranjan,
Distt Burdwan 713331,
West Bengal
3. The Appellate Authority
Chittranjan Locomotive Works,
Chittranjan,
Distt Burdwan 713331,
West Bengal
4. Officer in charge, NIC
5. Press E Group, CIC