In the Central Information Commission
at
New Delhi
File No: CIC/AD/A/2011/001276
Date of Hearing : July 14, 2011
Date of Decision : July 14, 2011
Parties:
Applicant
Shri Shri Kant Tiwari
CK - 16/32
Sudia
Varanasi 221 001
Uttar Pradesh
The Applicant was present at NIC Studio, Varanasi.
Respondents
The Public Information Officer
East Central Railway
Divisional Railway Manager's Office
Mughalsarai Division
Mughalsarai
Represented by : Shri Rakesh Kumar Roshan, PIO & Sr.DCM
Shri L.K.Rai, Ch.OS
NIC Studio, Varanasi
Information Commissioner : Mrs. Annapurna Dixit
___________________________________________________________________
In the Central Information Commission
at
New Delhi
File No: CIC/AD/A/2011/001276
ORDER
Background
1. The Applicant filed an RTI application dt.8.12.10 with the PIO, DRM Office, East Central Railway,
Mughalsarai. He stated that on 3.1.09 train No.2296 had reached Allahabad on 4.1.09 and that the
TTE had issued a memo to the RPF seeking their assistance to detain unauthorized passengers. In
this connection, he requested for confirmation from the PIO on whether the TTE had indeed handed
over a memo to any official at Mughal Sarai station or in any office of the Mughal Sarai Division . He
also requested for a copy of the memo . The PIO replied on 30.12.10 furnishing point wise
information and also informing the Applicant that no such memo had been received in his office. Not
satisfied with the reply, the Applicant filed an appeal dt.17.1.11 with the Appellate Authority. The
Appellate Authority replied on 17.2.11 Being aggrieved with the reply, Applicant filed a second appeal
dt.4.4.11 before CIC.
Decision
2. During the hearing, the Respondents submitted that the information sought in the instant case is
similar to that sought in appeal in case No.CIC/AD/A/2010/0010 which was decided on dt.1.9.10 by
the Commission and that as per the decision an affidavit has been provided to the Commission with
a copy to the Appellant informing the Commission about the nonavailability of the Memo in the
records of the Public Authority. This affidavit according to the Respondent has already been
furnished. The Respondent maintained his position that there is no further information available on
the subject with the Public Authority.
3. The Commission after hearing the submission of the Respondent and after noting that the affidavit
has already been provided to the Commission holds that in the absence of any memo, there is no
further information which can be authorized for disclosure and that the PIO is not obligated to answer
the Appellant’s query as to whether the memo was handed over to any official at Mughalsarai or not
since no records on the subject matter are available. The Commission, therefore, closes this instant
case while informing the Appellant that no further appeal with regard to the ‘memo’ mentioned in the
RTI application will be entertained by the Commission since there is no such memo available in the
records.
4. The appeal is rejected.
(Annapurna Dixit)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy
(G.Subramanian)
Deputy Registrar
Cc:
1. Shri Shri Kant Tiwari
CK – 16/32
Sudia
Varanasi 221 001
Uttar Pradesh
2. The Public Information Officer
East Central Railway
Divisional Railway Manager’s Office
Mughalsarai Division
Mughalsarai
3. The Appellate Authority
East Central Railway
Divisional Railway Manager’s Office
Mughalsarai Division
Mughalsarai
4. Officer in charge, NIC