Shashi Bindu Kumar Bind v. Cpio And Sr. Dpo East Central Railway

Bimal Julka, IC

1. The appellant, by way of his RTI application dated 09.03.2013 sought information on 8 points in the context of railway line between Dildar Nagar Junction and Tarighat Railway. The appellant, inter alia, specifically sought information regarding certified information about the number of level crossings, number of gates and locations of such gates on the aforementioned level crossings, gates installed in the aforementioned railway level crossings and the names of gatemen appointed and matters related thereto.

2. The CPIO, Sr. DPO transferred the RTI Application to the concerned public authority for providing the desired information to the appellant. Dissatisfied on not receiving from the concerned CPIO, the appellant approached the FAA on 17.05.2013 However, the order of the FAA, if any, is not available in the records with the Commission.

Hearing:

3. Facts emerging during the hearing:

4. The following were present:

Appellant: Absent;

Respondent: Mr. Shashi Kumar, Asstt. Divisional Engineer-Buxar (M:9771449206) through VC;

5. The appellant remained absent during the hearing. The respondent stated that vide their letter dated 30/12/2015, point-wise information had been supplied to the appellant. On being queried for enormous delay in providing information, the respondent explained that the information sought related to different divisions i.e track maintenance work, rail safety issues, encroachment on the railway land etc for which details had to be obtained from different divisions and necessary survey had to be conducted regarding encroachment on railway land etc. To collect and collate all this information was a time consuming exercise and hence the delay. However, they assured that they would be careful in future in this regard.

6. The appellant was not present to contest the submissions of the respondent or to substantiate his claims further.

DECISION

7. Keeping in view the facts of the case and the submission made by the respondent, it is evident that the information sought is purported to have been provided after abnormal delay that defeats the purpose of the RTI Act, 2005. The Commission would like to place on record its displeasure to the CPIO in handling RTI applications and is advised to be extremely careful in future.

8. The appeal stands disposed with the above direction.