In the Central Information Commission at New Delhi File No: CIC/AD/C/2011/000146 Date of Decision : March 21, 2011 Parties: Complainant Shri Ramesh D. H.No. 2C22 Ajaynagar. Ajmer Respondent The Public Information Officer Office of the Divisional Railway Manager North West Railway Ajmer Information Commissioner : Mrs. Annapurna Dixit ___________________________________________________________________ Decision Notice As given in the decision In the Central Information Commission at New Delhi File No: CIC/AD/C/2011/000146 ORDER
1. This complaintpetition relates to the Applicant’s RTIapplication dated 03.09.2010 (not legible)
through which he solicited certain documents in relation to the chargesheet dated 11.07.2005 as
also copies of statements of witnesses. In response to this application, the OS/DAR, on 10.09.2010,
informed the Applicant that the statements of witnesses requested by the Applicant based on which
the chargesheet had been framed are not available with the Public Authority since they had already
been furnished to him by the enquiry officer. The Applicant, however, being dissatisfied with this
reply, fled his 1stappeal, followed by a reminder dated 25.10.2010, with the Appellate Authority on
08.10.2010 requesting for a copy of the duty certificate, names of witnesses, as also witness
statements. On not receiving any reply from the FAA the Applicant filed the present petition dated
nil in the Commission, which was received by the Commission on 19.11.2010.
2. Upon examining the papers submitted by the Complainant, it is not clear as to in what manner the
information furnished to him is deficient. The Complainant has also not objected to the statement of
the OS/DAR that the requested documents have been furnished to him by the enquiry officer during
the course of enquiry. He just went on alleging that the Respondents are not complying with the
Rules of the Act and thereby protecting their senior officers. This allegation of the Complainant does
not stand to reason in absence of any material evidence.
3. Be that as it may, from the records submitted by the Appellant it is clear that the witness statements
have already been furnished to the Complainant. The PIO may provide proof of this fact to the
Complainant . Alternately a fresh set of statements after severing the names of witnesses u/s 10(1) of
the RTI Act may be furnished to the Complainant by 10.4.11. The duty certificate as sought by the
Complainant may also be furnished to him by the same date, if available with the Public Authority. If
not available, the Complainant to be informed accordingly while giving reasons for its nonavailability.
4. The Complaint is directed to be closed at the Commission’s level.
Authenticated true copy
1. Shri Ramesh D.
2. The Public Information Officer (RTI)
Office of the Divisional Railway Manager
North West Railway
3. Officer Incharge, NIC