Central Information Commission Judgements

Ms.Sumanta Bhattacharya vs Ministry Of Railways on 5 July, 2011

Central Information Commission
Ms.Sumanta Bhattacharya vs Ministry Of Railways on 5 July, 2011
                       In the Central Information Commission 
                                                      at
                                                 New Delhi

                                                                           File No: CIC/AD/A/2011/000909



Date  of Hearing :  July 5, 2011

Date of Decision :  July 5, 2011


Parties:

           Applicant

           Shri Sumanta Bhattacharya
           Qtr.No.1BR­72
           IIT Kharagpur Campus
           Kharagpur
           West Midnapore
           West Bengal 721 302

           The Applicant was not present during the hearing

           Respondents

           The Public Information Officer
           Eastern Railway
           Divisional Railway Manager's Office
           Howrah Division
           Howrah

           Represented by : Shri S.K.Sarkar, PIO
                                     Shri K.K.Patro, Appellate Authority
                                     ­ NIC Studio, Kolkata




                   Information Commissioner     :   Mrs. Annapurna Dixit
___________________________________________________________________
                             In the Central Information Commission 
                                                                  at
                                                         New Delhi

                                                                                            File No: CIC/AD/A/2011/000909
                                                              ORDER

Background

1. The Applicant filed an RTI Application dt.15.11.10 with the PIO, Railway Board, New Delhi.  The PIO 

& Sr.DPO, Eastern Railway, Howrah replied on 27.12.10.   The information sought and the reply 

provided are given below:

S.No. Information Sought Reply provided

i) To provide the revised pension fixation order, 
month   wise   calculations,   file   noting   and 
approval   showing   the   differential   amount 
payable   to   Late   Shri   Sunil   Kumar 
Bhattacharya due to implementation of 6th Pay 
Commission recommendation from the date of 
its commencement to till the date of his death

ii) To   provide   the   documents,   enclosures   and 
communications   showing   that   the   aforesaid 
arrear   payment   order   has   been   sent   to   his  Revised   pension   payment   authority   for   pre­
legal heirs and/or family pensioner. 2006 pensioners/family pensioners vide letter 

iii) To provide the revised family pension fixation  dt.20.12.10   has   been   issued   by   Sr.DFM, 
order, month wise calculations, file noting and  Eastern   Railway,   Howrah   to   the   SBI   with   a 
approval   showing   the   differential   amount  copy   to   Smt.Saraju   Bhattacharyya   for 
payable   to   Smt.   Saraju   Bhattacharjee,  disbursement  of   ‘Arrear   Revised   Pension’   of 
W/oLate  Shri  Sunil  Kumar  Bhattacharya due  late   Shri   Sunil   Kumar   Bhattacharyya   on 
to   implementation   of   6th  Pay   Commission  implementation   of   6   CPC   from   1.1.06   to 
th

recommendation   from   the   date   of  8.1.08 and ‘revised family pension’ with effect 
commencement   of   her   family   pension   to   till  from 9.1.08.   A copy of the said letter in two 
date. pages is enclosed.

 iv)             To   provide   the   documents,   enclosures   and 
                 communications   showing   that   the   aforesaid 
                 arrear payment order has been sent to family 
                 pension   disbursing   bank   and/or   family 
                 pensioner directly
 v)              According   to   Indian   Railways   rules   and            There  is no such prescribed  schedule.   It is 
                 regulations, to specify the number of days it               further informed that application of Smt. Saraju 

normally   takes   at   each   stage   to   settle   the  Bhattacharyya   dt.2.2.10   for   revision   of 
fixation   matter   of   the   6th  Pay   Commission  pension/family   pension   received   as   an 
recommendations   for   those   pensioners   who  annexure   to   the   RTI   application   dt.15.11.10 
have   died   in   harness   during   this   transition  and necessary advise to the concerned bank 
period. issued on 20.12.10.  Thus, it took only 35 days 
to settle review of pension.

vi) To   provide   the   letters,   circulars,   orders   and  All the instructions are available in the Railway 
advertisements which has been published by  Website.   For details regarding publication of 
the   railway   authorities   in   different   medias  advertisements   in   the   newspaper,   you   may 
and/or   sent   directly   to   the   pensioners/family  write to Chief Public Relations Officer of this 
pensioners   to   aware   them   regarding   the  Railway.     However,   if   any   specific 
procedure   for   claiming   their   arrears   in   due  circular/orders are required, you are requested 
course. to   ask   for   definite   information   which   will   be 
provided, if available.

Not  satisfied  with  the  reply,  the Applicant filed an appeal dt.18.1.11 with the Appellate Authority 

stating that while he had received the copy of the revised pension payment authority, he has yet to 

receive the month wise statement.  He also pointed out the missing information in the response given 

by the PIO.   Shri S.R.Ghoshal, Appellate Authority replied on 25.1.11 stating that information as 

sought has been furnished.   Being aggrieved with the reply, the Applicant filed a second appeal 

dt.21.2.11 before CIC.

Decision

2. During the hearing, the Respondents submitted that against points 1 and 2, information as available 

has been provided and that information regarding month wise calculation has to be provided by the 

concerned   bank.     The   same   is   not   maintained   by   their   office.     With   regard   to   point   4,   the 

Respondents submitted that all information is available on the website and if any specific information 

is being sought, the same can be provided.

3. The Commission after reviewing the documents placed on record and after hearing the submission of 

the Respondents decided as follows:

Points 1 & 2: Since the information per se is not available with the Public Authority, no further 

disclosure can be authorized.     The Appellant may approach the concerned bank with a fresh RTI 

application to obtain the information, if he so desires.

Point 3: The Commission holds that complete information has been provided against this point.

Point 4: The  information related to Rules and Regulations sought is available in the public domain 

(website)  and    the  Appellant  being apparently a student or teacher at IIT, Kharagpur can easily 

download   the  information  for   himself.    He  would  in  the  process  may  also  be  saving  paper  and 
contributing   to   conservation   of   environment.     However,   with   regard   to     information   about 

advertisements, the PIO is directed to seek the assistance of Chief Public Relations Officer u/s 5(4) of 

the RTI Act to obtain the requisite information and provide the same to the Appellant by 5.8.11. 

4. The appeal is disposed of with the above directions.

 (Annapurna Dixit)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy 

(G.Subramanian)
Deputy Registrar

Cc:

1. Shri Sumanta Bhattacharya
Qtr.No.1BR­72
IIT Kharagpur Campus
Kharagpur
West Midnapore
West Bengal 721 302

2. The Public Information Officer
Eastern Railway
Divisional Railway Manager’s Office
Howrah Division
Howrah

3. The Appellate Authority
Eastern Railway
Divisional Railway Manager’s Office
Howrah Division
Howrah

4. Officer in charge, NIC

Note: 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 RTI­Act, giving (1) copy of RTI­application, (2) copy of the Commission’s decision, and (3) any 
other documents which he/she considers to be necessary for deciding the complaint.