In the Central Information Commission
at
New Delhi
File No: CIC/AD/A/2011/001357
Heard through Video Conferencing.
Date of Hearing : August 16, 2011
Date of Decision : August 16, 2011
Parties:
Applicant
Shri Ashok Srivastava
Advocate
R.No. 1584/05
Jawan Singh Colony
Krishna Nagar,
Satna.
Applicant was not present.
Respondent(s)
West Central Railway
Divisional Railway Manager's Office
Jabalpur Division
Jabalpur.
Represented by : Shri Deepak Gupta, Sr.DPO/PIO
Shri Amitabh Nigam, ADRM/AA
Information Commissioner : Mrs. Annapurna Dixit
___________________________________________________________________
In the Central Information Commission
at
New Delhi
File No: CIC/AD/A/2011/001357
ORDER
Background
1. The RTI Application dated 11.3.11 was filed by the Applicant with the PIO, DRM office West Central
Railway, Jabalpur requesting for certified copies of train register book at Sihora Railway station on
1.12.2010 from 4 pm to 10 pm. The PIO replied on 22.3.11 denying the information under section 8
(1)(d) of the RTI Act.( Information including commercial confidence, trade secrets or intellectual
property, the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of a third party, unless the
competent authority is satisfied that larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information)
The Applicant filed first appeal on 29.3.11 to which the Appellate Authority replied on 5.5.11
upholding the decision of the PIO. The Applicant however filed his second appeal before the
Commission requesting for the information once again.
Decision.
2. During the hearing the Respondent submitted that the Appellant has not specified the particular train
about which he is seeking information. The information sought by the Appellant is about all the trains
passing through a particular station(Siroha) and hence is voluminous in nature. Also, according to
the Respondent, some of the trains passing through Siroha station some times carry defense
equipment and other commodities and the information about these commodities is available in the
train register book which is maintained at the station. The train register book also contains the
names of parties to whom the commodities belong as also the train’s destination and various other
sensitive information. The Respondent therefore contended that the information is exempted from
disclosure under section 8(1)(d) and also Section 8(1)(a) of the RTI Act. He further stated that if the
Appellant provides him with the specific train number about which he is seeking information the
same can be provided to him after ensuring that any sensitive information that has being sought is
severed under section 10(1) of the RTI Act.
3. The Commission after careful consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, noted that
information sought is indeed voluminous and that the exercise of compiling the information after
severing that which is exempt u/s of 10(1) of the RTI Act will disproportionately divert the resources
of the Public Authority. The Appellant is therefore advised to provide the numbers of few trains
within five days of receipt of this order so that the Respondent can provide the required information
by 20th September 2011 after invoking section 10(1) of the RTI Act if required to severe information
that is exempt u/s 8(1).
4. The appeal is accordingly disposed of.
(Annapurna Dixit)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy
(G.Subramanian)
Deputy Registrar
1. Shri Ashok Srivastava
Advocate
R.No. 1584/05
Jawan Singh Colony
Krishna Nagar,
Satna.
2. The Public Information Officer
West Central Railway
Divisional Railway Manager’s Office
Jabalpur Division
Jabalpur.
3. The Appellate Authority
West Central Railway
Divisional Railway Manager’s Office
Jabalpur Division
Jabalpur.
4. Officer Incharge, NIC.
In case, the Commission’s above directives have not been complied with by the Respondents, the
Appellant/Complainant may file a formal complaint with the Commission under Section 18(1) of the RTI Act, giving
(1) copy of RTI application, (2) copy of PIO’s reply, (3) copy of the decision of the first Appellant Authority, (4) copy
of the Commission’s decision, and (5) any other documents which he/she considers to be necessary for deciding
the complaint. In the prayer, the Appellant/Complainant may indicate, what information has not been provided.