Central Information Commission
CIC/AD/C/2010/000214
Dated August 3, 2010
Name of the Applicant : Shri Saidur Rahman
Name of the Public Authority : DRM Office, Northern Railway, Lucknow
Background
1. The Applicant filed an RTI application dt.9.2.09 with the PIO, DRM Office, Northern Railway, Lucknow
requesting for information against 18 points and several sub points on different issues including his
medical fitness, selection of panel, various rules, vacancies, service book etc. On not receiving any
reply, he filed a complaint dt.17.4.09 before CIC. The Commission vide its decision
No.CIC/SG/C/2009/000361/3179 dt.11.5.09 had remanded the case back to the Appellate Authority
with a direction to the Appellate Authority to decide the matter in accordance with the provisions of
the RTI Act after giving both sides an opportunity of being heard . Based on the CIC’s order, the
Applicant had filed an appeal dt.2.6.09 with the Appellate Authority. The PIO replied on 30.6.09
instead of the Appellate Authority. Not satisfied with the reply, the Applicant filed a complaint dt.
24.9.09 before CIC.
2. The Bench of Mrs. Annapurna Dixit, Information Commissioner, scheduled the hearing for August 3,
2010 through video conferencing. However, due to power failure at NIC Studio, Lucknow hearing
was held through audio conferencing.
3. Ms.Renu Sharma, Deemed PIO & Sr.DPO representing the Public Authority was present at NIC
Studio, Lucknow.
4. The Applicant was not present during the hearing.
Decision
5. The Respondent Ms.Renu Sharma, Sr.DPO submitted that the Appellant vide his RTI application
had sought information against 18 paras and several sub paras and that the PIO had provided point
wise information on 5.3.09. Not satisfied the Appellant had approached the Commission who had
remanded the case back to the Appellate Authority. She added that the Appellant had filed an
appeal dt.24.9.09 with the Appellate Authority & ADRM enclosing the RTI application. However the
Sr.DPO cum PIO on behalf of the Appellate Authority had replied on 3.11.09 enclosing the same
reply as given on 5.3.09. When queried by the Commission as to why the Appellate Authority did not
dispose of the appeal, she added that Appellate Authority was on leave and that the reply was given
after taking the approval of the Appellate Authority on the noting page.
6. The Commission noted that Appellate Authority had not disposed of the appeal and that pontwise
information had not been provided. The Commission therefore once again remands the case back to
the Appellate Authority with the direction to review the first appeal and to dispose it off in accordance
with the provisions of the RTI Act while warning him not to delegate the disposal of appeals to a
junior officer as it tantamounts to violation of the law.
7. The case is remanded to Appellate Authority.
(Annapurna Dixit)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy:
(G.Subramanian)
Deputy Registrar
Cc:
1. Shri Saidur Rahman
R/o Running Shed Colony
L.D14 A, Terhi Pulia
Alam Bagh
Lucknow 226 005
2. The PIO
Northern Railway
Divisional Railway Manager’s Office
Lucknow Division, Hazratganj
Lucknow
3. Officer incharge, NIC