Central Information Commission
CIC/AD/C/2010/000751
Dated: September 23, 2010
Name of the Appellant : Mr. Vivek Sharma
Name of the Public Authority : Northern Railway, New Delhi
Background
1. The Applicant filed his RTI application on 16.02.2010, with the PIO, Northern Railway, New Delhi. He
wanted to know the amount spent on the modernization of the Panipat Junction Station. He also
wanted to know which contractor/engineer had been given the new contract for the new ticket
booking counter and also the number of challans issued by the Chief Ticket Inspector in January,
2010 to those who were traveling without tickets. The PIO replied on 23.03.2010 stating that points 1
& 2 pertain to the Engineering branch and denying the address and educational qualification of Chief
Ticket Inspector Under section 8 (g) of the RTI Act. Information against points 1 & 2 was also
provided by the Engineering department on 15.04.2010. Not satisfied with this reply, the Applicant
filed his First Appeal dated NIL stating that he had been harassed to withdraw his appeal and also
seeking information once again. The Appellate Authority replied on 03.05.2010 stating that the reply
had already been sent to the Appellant vide letter dated 23.03.2010 while requesting the Appellant to
provide the name of the official who had threatened him so that necessary action can been taken.
The Appellant named one Chief Ticket Inspector Mr. Indu Shekhar in this connection. He also filed a
complaint before the Commission on 15.04.2010 seeking the complete information once again.
2. The Bench of Mrs. Annapurna Dixit, Information Commissioner, scheduled the hearing for September
23, 2010.
3. Mr. Jagjit Singh, Sr. DMM, Mr. V.D. Meena, ACM/SS, and Mr. N.N. Kalia, DHS I represented the
Public Authority.
4. The Appellant was heard through audio conferencing during the hearing.
Decision
5. During the hearing the Respondent submitted that the Chief Ticket Inspector does not have the
authority to issue challans and can only issue extra fare for tickets, hence the Complainant’s contention that
the Chief Ticket Inspector had asked him to withdraw his application regarding the challan issued to him does
not seem to be the complete truth. The Respondent also added that on enquiry the said Chief Ticket Inspector
had given in writing on 14.07.2010 that he had never met the Complainant. Hence the question of his
threatening the Complainant does not arise. The Complainant who was heard over the telephone stated that
he had not been provided with the breakup of the amount of Rs. 11.5 Lakhs expended on the modernization
of the station. The Respondents however, pointed out that the Complainant had not sought this information in
the RTI Application and that all the information as sought by him has already been provided.
6. The Commission after hearing both sides and on perusal of the submissions on record directs the
PIO to provide the name and the qualification of the Chief Ticket Inspector and denies the disclosure of his
residential address U/s 8 (1)(g) of the RTI Act. It was noted that the remaining information had already been
provided by the PIO. The Complainant is advised to file a fresh RTI application for obtaining the break up of
the total expenditure of 11.5. lakhs .
7. The complaint is accordingly disposed of.
(Annapurna Dixit)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy:
(G. Subramanian)
Deputy Registrar
Cc:
1. Mr. Vivek Sharma,
H.No 26/2, Near Railway Station,
Dharamveer Colony,
Gharonda,
Karnal 132114
2. The Public Information Officer,
Northern Railway,
Divisional Railway Manager’s Office,
State Entry Road,
New Delhi
3. Officer in charge, NIC