In the Central Information Commission
at
New Delhi
1. CIC/AD/A/2011/000582 10. CIC/AD/A/2011/000599
2. CIC/AD/A/2011/000585 11. CIC/AD/A/2011/000600
3. CIC/AD/A/2011/000586 12. CIC/AD/A/2011/000601
4. CIC/AD/A/2011/000588 13. CIC/AD/A/2011/000603
5. CIC/AD/A/2011/000589 14. CIC/AD/A/2011/000604
6. CIC/AD/A/2011/000590 15. CIC/AD/A/2011/000605
7. CIC/AD/A/2011/000591 16. CIC/AD/C/2011/000395
8. CIC/AD/A/2011/000592 17. CIC/AD/C/2011/000398
9. CIC/AD/A/2011/000593
Date of Hearing : September 22, 2011
Date of Decision : September 22, 2011
Parties:
Applicant
Shri Avinash Vinayak Prabhune
113, Pandurang Gawande Layout
Ranapratap Nagar
Nagpur 440 022
The Appellant was present during the hearing
Respondents
Attached.
Information Commissioner : Mrs. Annapurna Dixit
___________________________________________________________________
List of Respondents
S.No. Case No. Public Authority Represented by
1. CIC/AD/A/2011/000582 West Central Railway, Shri N.G.Hardas, APIO
Jabalpur
2. CIC/AD/A/2011/000585 East Coast Railway, Shri J.L.Jena, SCM
Bhubaneswar
3. CIC/AD/A/2011/000586 North Western Railway, Shri M.L.Meena, Shri S.R.Meena, Shri
Jaipur A.K.Mehta, Shri M.K.Sharma, Shri
Dhirumal, Shri Paramjitsingh, Shri
Laxmikant Vyas
4. CIC/AD/A/2011/000588 Northern Railway, New Delhi Shri J.k.Malhotra, Shri Rakesh Tyagi, Shri
Mahesh Kumar
5. CIC/AD/A/2011/000589 Southern Railway, Chennai Mrs.T.R.Boaz, CCO
6. CIC/AD/A/2011/000590 Railway Board Shri Sanjay Manocho, Shri
H.J.Shivprasad, Shri Krishan Pal and Shri
Shambhu Anand
7. CIC/AD/A/2011/000591 South Western Railway, Hubli None
8. CIC/AD/A/2011/000592 Eastern Railway, Kolkata Shri G.C.Roy and Shri N.N.Pattanayak
9. CIC/AD/A/2011/000593 North Eastern Railway, Shri V.K.Gupta, Dy.GM/G
Gorakhpur
10. CIC/AD/A/2011/000599 Central Railway, Mumbai Shri Vinit Kumar, Shri R.B.Dixit and Shri
Rajesh Kumar
11. CIC/AD/A/2011/000600 South East Central Railway, Shri S.Gagarin, Shri Santosh Kumar and
Bilaspur Shri K.S.Mahadevan
12. CIC/AD/A/2011/000601 South Central Railway, Ms.Smita Rawat, Shri P.V.N.Ravikumar,
Secunderabad Shri D.N.Kumar and Shri
S.B.Venkatakrishna
13. CIC/AD/A/2011/000603 North Central Railway, Shri Sanjay S.Negi, Shri M.Ahmad and
Allahabad Shri P.K.Pandey
14. CIC/AD/A/2011/000604 Northeast Frontier Railway, Shri Khindu Ram, Dy.GM/G
Guwahati
15. CIC/AD/A/2011/000605 Western Railway, Mumbai Shri Santosh Kumar Jha, Shri kailash
Yadav and Shri B.B.Pinele
16. CIC/AD/C/2011/000395 East Central Railway, Hajipur Shri Humayun and Shri Pankaj Kumar
17. CIC/AD/C/2011/000398 South Eastern Railway, Shri R.K.Bandyopadhyay and Shri Jahar
Kolkata Basu
2
In the Central Information Commission
at
New Delhi
1. CIC/AD/A/2011/000582 10. CIC/AD/A/2011/000599
2. CIC/AD/A/2011/000585 11. CIC/AD/A/2011/000600
3. CIC/AD/A/2011/000586 12. CIC/AD/A/2011/000601
4. CIC/AD/A/2011/000588 13. CIC/AD/A/2011/000603
5. CIC/AD/A/2011/000589 14. CIC/AD/A/2011/000604
6. CIC/AD/A/2011/000590 15. CIC/AD/A/2011/000605
7. CIC/AD/A/2011/000591 16. CIC/AD/C/2011/000395
8. CIC/AD/A/2011/000592 17. CIC/AD/C/2011/000398
9. CIC/AD/A/2011/000593
ORDER
Background
CIC/AD/A/2011/000582
The Applicant filed an RTI Application dt.24.7.10 with the PIO, West Central Railway Jabalpur seeking
information against 17 points . Shri Ajay Srivastava, PIO replied on 9.8.10 furnishing information against three
points. The Applicant filed an appeal dt.20.9.10 with the Appellate Authority stating that information supplied is
incorrect and incomplete. In response to the first appeal, the PIO replied on 27.10.10. Being aggrieved with
the reply, the Applicant filed a second appeal dt.5.1.11 before CIC
CIC/AD/A/2011/000585
2. The Applicant filed an RTI Application dt.24.7.10 with the PIO, East Coast Railway, Bhubaneswar
seeking information against 17 points. Shri K.S.Sahoo, Chief Traffic Manager, replied on 21.9.10 furnishing
point wise information. Not satisfied with the reply, the Applicant filed an appeal dt.20.9.10 with the Appellate
Authority and on not receiving any reply, the Applicant filed a second appeal dt.5.1.11 before CIC.
CIC/AD/A/2011/000586
3. The Applicant filed an RTI Application dt.24.7.10 with the PIO, North Western Railway, Jaipur
seeking information against 17 points. The Applicant filed an appeal dt.20.9.10 with the Appellate Authority
stating that application has been forwarded to various divisions but no reply has been received. The Appellate
3
Authority replied on 4.11.10. Being aggrieved with the reply, the Applicant filed a second appeal dt.5.1.11
before CIC
4
CIC/AD/A/2011/000588
4. The Applicant filed an RTI Application dt.24.7.10 with the PIO, Northern Railway, New Delhi seeking
information against 17 points. The PIO replied on 11.8.10 enclosing the point wise information. Not satisfied
with the reply, the Applicant filed an appeal dt.20.9.10 with the Appellate Authority. The Appellate Authority
replied on 19.11.10.. Being aggrieved with the reply, the Applicant filed a second appeal dt.5.1.11 before CIC
CIC/AD/A/2011/000589
5. The Applicant filed an RTI Application dt.24.7.10 with the PIO, Southern Railway, Chennaiseeking
information against 17 points. Mrs.T.R.Boaz, PIO replied on 25.8.10 furnishing point wise information. The
Applicant filed an appeal dt.20.9.10 with the Appellate Authority stating that information provided is incomplete,
incorrect and false. Shri Mangat Rai, Appellate Authority replied on 29.10.10 stating that final reply will be sent
shortly. On not receiving any further reply, the Applicant filed a second appeal dt.5.1.11 before CIC
CIC/AD/A/2011/000590
6. The Applicant filed an RTI Application dt.24.7.10 with the PIO, Ministry of Railways, New Delhi
seeking information against 23 points. Shri V.K.Samuel replied on 21.9.10 furnishing information against
points 1 and 23 and stating that final reply will be sent as soon as it is made available. The Applicant filed an
appeal dt.1.11.10 with the Appellate Authority stating that information supplied is incomplete and incorrect. On
not receiving any reply, the Applicant filed a second appeal dt.5.1.11 before CIC
CIC/AD/A/2011/000591
7. The Applicant filed an RTI Application dt.24.7.10 with the PIO, South Western Railway, Hubli seeking
information against 17 points. On not receiving any reply, he filed an appeal dt.20.9.10 with the Appellate
Authority reiterating his request for the information. Shri S.Mohan, Appellate Authority replied on 4.10.10
directing the PIO/Commercial to provide the information within 10 days from the date of receipt of the order.
On not receiving any further reply, the reply, the Applicant filed a second appeal dt.5.1.11 before CIC
CIC/AD/A/2011/000592
8. The Applicant filed an RTI Application dt.24.7.10 with the PIO, Eastern Railway, Kolkata seeking
information against 17 points. The PIO replied on 27.8.10 furnishing partial information and stating that
5
information on other items will be supplied on receipt from the concerned PIOs. The Applicant filed an appeal
dt.27.9.10 with the Appellate Authority stating that information provided is incorrect and incomplete. The
Appellate Authority replied on 11.11.10 directing the PIO to provide complete reply within 10 days of receipt of
this order. On not receiving any further reply, the Applicant filed a second appeal dt.5.1.11 before CIC
CIC/AD/A/2011/000593
9. The Applicant filed an RTI Application dt.24.7.10 with the PIO, north Eastern Railway, Gorakhpur
seeking information against 17 points. Shri R.C.Srivastava, PIO replied on 31.8.10 furnishing point wise
information. The Applicant filed an appeal dt.20.9.10 with the Appellate Authority stating that information
supplied is incorrect and incomplete. Shri R.P.Nibaria, Appellate Authority replied on 25.11.10. Being
aggrieved with the reply, the Applicant filed a second appeal dt.5.1.11 before CIC
CIC/AD/A/2011/000599
10. The Applicant filed an RTI Application dt.24.7.10 with the PIO, Central Railway, Mumbai seeking
information against 17 points. Shri A.K.Saini, APIO replied on 30.8.10 furnishing information against points 1
and 2 and added that rest of the information would be supplied on receipt of the same. Not satisfied with the
reply, the Applicant filed an appeal dt.23.9.10 with the Appellate Authority. Shri S.V.Arya, Appellate Authority
replied on 10.11.10 enclosing the remarks on the appeal received from the PIO/Commercial. Being aggrieved
with the reply, the Applicant filed a second appeal dt.5.1.11 before CIC
CIC/AD/A/2011/000600
11. The Applicant filed an RTI Application dt.24.7.10 with the PIO, South East Central Railway Bilaspur
seeking information against 17 points. Shri A.K.Gupta replied on 6.8.10 furnishing information against points
12 and 13. The Applicant filed an appeal dt.20.9.10 with the Appellate Authority stating that information
supplied is incorrect and incomplete. Shri K. Seshasayi, Appellate Authority replied on 27.10.10 furnishing
clarification against points 24, 610 and 1417. Being aggrieved with the reply, the Applicant filed a second
appeal dt.5.1.11 before CIC
CIC/AD/A/2011/000601
12. The Applicant filed an RTI Application dt.24.7.10 with the PIO, South Central Secunderabad seeking
information against 17 points. Shri R.Dhananjayulu replied on 27.8.10 furnishing information against points 1
6
to 4 and stating that information is not available against rest of the points. Not satisfied with the reply, the
Applicant filed an appeal dt.20.9.10 with the Appellate Authority. Shri Vashishta Johri, Appellate Authority
replied on 27.10.10 providing further clarification. Being aggrieved with the reply, the Applicant filed a second
appeal dt.5.1.11 before CIC
7
CIC/AD/A/2011/000603
13. The Applicant filed an RTI Application dt.24.7.10 with the PIO, North Central Railway Allahabad
seeking information against 17 points. The Applicant filed an appeal dt.20.9.10 with the Appellate Authority
stating that information supplied by various divisions are incorrect and incomplete. The Appellate Authority
replied on 21.10.10. Being aggrieved with the reply, the Applicant filed a second appeal dt.5.1.11 before CIC
CIC/AD/A/2011/000604
14. The Applicant filed an RTI Application dt.24.7.10 with the PIO, Northeast Frontier Railway, Guwahati
seeking information against 17 points. Shri Khindu Ram, PIO replied on 24.8.10. Not satisfied with the reply,
the Applicant filed an appeal dt.20.9.10 with the Appellate Authority. Shri Alok Dave, Appellate Authority
replied on 12.10.10. Being aggrieved with the reply, the Applicant filed a second appeal dt.5.1.11 before CIC
CIC/AD/A/2011/000605
15. The Applicant filed an RTI Application dt.24.7.10 with the PIO, Western Railway, Mumbai seeking
information against 17 points. Shri Aditya Kumar, CPIO replied on 27.8.10 enclosing the information against
points 1 to 4, 6 to 11 and 15 to 17 and stating that information against rest of the queries would be supplied as
soon as it is received. Not satisfied with the reply, the Applicant filed an appeal dt.20.9.10 with the Appellate
Authority. Shri S.K.Sharma, Appellate Authority replied on 8.11.10. Being aggrieved with the reply, the
Applicant filed a second appeal dt.5.1.11 before CIC
CIC/AD/C/2011/000395
16. The Applicant filed an RTI Application dt.24.7.10 with the PIO, East Central Railway Hajipur seeking
information against 17 points. On not receiving any reply, the Applicant filed an appeal dt.20.9.10 with the
Appellate Authority and on not receiving any reply, the Applicant filed a complaint dt.5.1.11 before CIC
CIC/AD/C/2011/000398
17. The Applicant filed an RTI Application dt.24.7.10 with the PIO, South Eastern Railway, Kolkata
seeking information against 17 points. On not receiving any reply, the Applicant filed an appeal
dt.20.9.10 with the Appellate Authority and on not receiving any reply, the Applicant filed a complaint
dt.5.1.11 before CIC
8
Decision
18. The Commission decided to hear the Appellant and all the Respondents from different Zonal
Railways at the same time and to give a common decision since the Appellant had sought the same
information from all the Zonal Railways in his RTI application
19. The Appellant submitted during the hearing that the Ministry of Railways had issued a Commercial
Circular No.20 in the year 2008 dated 20.3.08 regarding ‘Revision of Passenger Fares – Railway
Budget 200809’ and that the revised fares were applicable from 1.4.08. He stated that as informed
in the circular about 5000 sleeper coaches were converted into high capacity coaches (i.e. from 72 to
81 berths) and that therefore as per clause 2.3(i) and (iii), 5.3 of the Commercial circular mentioned
above , all the passengers all over India who have traveled in these High Capacity coaches are
entitled to get 6% discount in fares. He further added that in this connection he would like to restrict
his questions instead of 17 in his RTI application to two including the number of passengers and
amounts reimbursed to the passengers who had traveled by trains with the defined coaches which
were attached to them and the number of passengers as also the total amount yet to be reimbursed
in the case of trains with high capacity coaches (nondefined) attached to them only in the case of
exigencies, It was the contention of the Appellant that most of the 5000 coaches were not made use
of for the purpose they were allotted and that the passengers had therefore to face harassment due
to shortage of berths. According to the Appellant, the coaches which were not defined, were then
used in the case of exigencies and that no effort was made to follow the instructions given in the
circular in terms of 6% reduction in fares in the case of such coaches, thereby defeating the purpose
for which these coaches were identified. The Appellant during the hearing also proposed that the
money that has been set aside for reimbursement to passengers who had traveled by the undefined
coaches (in the case of exigencies) , presumably running into crores, should be transferred to the
Prime Minister’s Relief Fund since at this stage it will be physically impossible to reimburse the
amounts to lakhs of passengers who had traveled in these undefined coaches. He expressed his
intention to file a PIL in the Court in this connection.
9
20. The Respondents submitted that the scheme was introduced in April 2008 but was later withdrawn in
February 2009 and that the fare was automatically discounted at the time of booking of tickets in
trains with defined coaches , across India. They also admitted that a number of the allotted
coaches(out of the 5000) had not been defined accordingly, and were used only in the case of
exigency along with trains with normal coaches and that no refund had been made to passengers
since such coaches were not considered as falling within the ambit of the scheme that was launched.
21. While most PIOs expressed their doubt during the course of hearing about the availability of
information sought by the Appellant, the Commission based on the submissions of two PIOs,
including the CPIO Northern Railways, HQs, Baroda House (who had already provided the
information) that information can be provided with a little bit of effort, directed the PIOs of all Zonal
Railways to provide the following information to the Appellant:
22. (i) no. of coaches defined as high capacity coaches allotted to the Zonal Railway, (if available and
the number of passengers who had traveled in them
(ii) no. of nondefined coaches used in the case of exigency along with number of passengers who
had traveled in such undefined coaches for both classes
(iii) amount refunded to passengers in the case of nondefined coaches
for the period April 2008 to 10.6.10.
In the event any information is not available with any of the PIOs, the PIO to provide an affidafit to the
Commission with a copy to the Appellant affirming the nonavailbility of information and also giving
reasons for the same.
It was agreed by all that it will not be possible to provide the amount to be refunded to
passengers who had traveled by the nondefined coaches.
23. The PIO, Railway Board to also provide to the Appellant a list of the number of the high capacity
coaches (totaling around 5000) that were allotted to each Zonal Railway .
24. The complete information to be provided free of cost to the Appellant by 22.11.11.
25. The appeal is disposed of with the above directions.
10
(Annapurna Dixit)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy
(G.Subramanian)
Deputy Registrar
Cc:
1. Shri Avinash Vinayak Prabhune 2. The Public Information Officer
113, Pandurang Gawande Layout West central Railway
Ranapratap Nagar General Manager's Office
Nagpur 440 022 Indira Market
Jabalpur
3. The Appellate Authority 4. The Public Information Officer
West central Railway East Coast Railway
General Manager's Office General Manager's Office
Indira Market ECoR Sadan, Chandrasekharpur
Jabalpur Bhubaneswar 751 017
5. The Appellate Authority 6. The Public Information Officer
East Coast Railway North Western Railway
General Manager's Office Headquarter Office
ECoR Sadan, Chandrasekharpur Hasanpura Road
Bhubaneswar 751 017 Jaipur
7. The Appellate Authority 8. The Public Information Officer
North Western Railway Northern Railway
Headquarter Office Headquarter Office
Hasanpura Road Baroda House
Jaipur New Delhi
9. The Appellate Authority 10. The Public Information Officer
Northern Railway Southern Railway
Headquarter Office General Manager's Office
Baroda House Park Town
New Delhi Chennai 600 003
11
11. The Appellate Authority 12. The Public Information Officer
Southern Railway Ministry of railways
General Manager's Office Railway Board
Park Town Rail Bhawan
Chennai 600 003 New Delhi
13. The Appellate Authority 14. The Public Information Officer
Ministry of railways South Western Railway
Railway Board Headquarters Office
Rail Bhawan Hubli
New Delhi
15. The Appellate Authority 16. The Public Information Officer
South Western Railway Eastern Railway
Headquarters Office General Manager's office
Hubli 17, N.S.Road
Kolkata 700 001
12
17. The Appellate Authority 18. The PIO
Eastern Railway North Eastern Railway
General Manager's office General Manager's Office
17, N.S.Road Gorakhpur 273 012
Kolkata 700 001
19. The Appellate Authority 20. The Public Information Officer
North Eastern Railway Central Railway
General Manager's Office General Manager's Office
Gorakhpur 273 012 CST, Mumbai
21. The Appellate Authority 22. The Public Information Officer
Central Railway South East Central Railway
General Manager's Office Headquarters Office
CST, Mumbai Bilaspur 495 004
23. The Appellate Authority 24. The Public Information Officer
South East Central Railway South Central Railway
Headquarters Office General Manager's Office
Bilaspur 495 004 Secunderabad 500 071
25. The Appellate Authority 26. The Public Information Officer
South Central Railway North Central Railway
General Manager's Office Headquarters Office
Secunderabad 500 071 Subedarganj
Allahabad
27. The Appellate Authority 28. The Public Information Officer
North Central Railway Northeast frontier Railway
Headquarters Office General Manager's Office
Subedarganj Maligaon
Allahabad Guwahati 11
29. The Appellate Authority 30. The Public Information Officer
Northeast frontier Railway Western railway
General Manager's Office Headquarters Office
Maligaon Churchgate
Guwahati 11 Mumbai 400 020
31. The Appellate Authority 32. The Public Information Officer
Western railway East Central Railway
Headquarters Office General Manager's Office
Churchgate Hajipur 844 101
Mumbai 400 020
33. The Public Information Officer
South Eastern Railway
13
Headquarter Office
Garden Reach Road
Kolkata
14