Central Information Commission
CIC/AD/C/2009/001087
Dated : August 11, 2010
Name of the Applicant : Mr. Kundan Lal
Name of the Public Authority : Northern Railway, New Delhi
Background
1. The RTI application was filed by the Applicant on 20.10.08 with the Gen. Manager, Northern Railway,
New Delhi stating that due to nonfixation of payment since August 1976 and due payments,
difference in leave encashment he has felt harassed. He requested that the matter may be looked
into by the concerned authorities and the payments due to him be made without further delay. As no
reply was received, he registered a complaint with the CIC on 19.2.09.
2. The Bench of Mrs Annapurna Dixit, Information Commissioner issued an order dated 14.6.10
directing the PIO to furnish the information by 30.7.10 and to appear before the Commission on 11.8.10 with
all the relevant documents and also with the explanation to the showcause notice issued to him.
3. Mr. Rakesh Tyagi, PIO; Mr. Janardan Singh Dy CPO ; Mr. U.R. Bharti. COS and Mr. J.K.L.
Srivastava OS/E represented the Public Authority.
4. The Applicant was present during the hearing.
Decision
5. The Respondent stated that the application originally filed was not received by the PIO However, the
CPIO, Northern Railway had received copy of the RTI application along with the hearing notice which was sent
by the Commission. On receipt of the same it was transferred to the PIO, Alambagh, Lucknow who sent a
reply on 26.7.10 to the Appellant. The Appellant during the hearing requested the Commission to arrange for
the payments as sought in his RTI application . In response to this prayer, the Respondent narrated the
sequence of events related to the Appellant’s grievance the gist of which is as follows:
The Appellant had already been furnished with a reply in this connection in response to a
representation from the Appellant addressed to the Prime Minister of India, on 28.4.09. This fact has
not been divulged in the Appellant’s submissions The Appellant had repeatedly approached thelower and High Courts and the last time the Appellant had approached the High Court, the High Court
had rejected his recall application by its judgment order dated 6.7.09. The judgment order of the High
Court had been fully complied with and the same was also acknowledged by the Appellant through
receipt of cheque no. 985599 dated 28.2.09 amounting to Rs.10, 547/.
6. The Commission on perusal of submissions on record and after hearing both sides holds that that the
information has indeed been furnished to the Appellant more than once and drops the penalty
proceedings initiated against the PIO . It was also noted that the relief being sought by the
Appellant falls outside the ambit of the RTI Act. However, in the interest of the Appellant it is
recommended that the PIO, Lucknow give a personal hearing to the Appellant on 26.8.10 in his
office and provide clarification. The PIO is directed to forward a copy of this order to the PIO,
Lucknow.
7. The complaint is rejected as there is no substance in it and the case is closed at the Commission’s
end.
(Annapurna Dixit)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy
(G.Subramanian)
Deputy Registrar
Cc:
1. Shri Kundan Lal
R/o II/68 B, Sleeper Ground
Alam Bagh
Lucknow 226005
2. The PIO
Northern Railway
Headquarters Office
Baroda House
New Delhi
3. Officer Incharge, NIC