Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(CIC) 2469
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Vinod Kumar Tiwari, IC
Jayesh Sindhav – Appellant
Versus
CPIO, Sanjay Naresh AM/Law & CPIO, Rail Land Development Authority – Respondent
CIC/WRAIL/A/2023/638646
For the Appellant:
For the Respondents: Sanjay Naresh, J S Mishra
Failure to properly transfer an RTI application to the relevant authority can lead to penalties under the RTI Act.
Headnote:(A) Right to Information Act, 2005 - Section 6(3) - Appellant sought information relating to a public tender regarding railway land - Respondent directed to comply with RTI provisions by transferring relevant queries to the associated public authority - Failure to do so results in directive for penalties against the CPIO. (Paras 11, 12)
(B) The CPIO asserted that the queries were answered correctly and justified their absence in the previous hearing - The Commission accepted their explanation, acknowledging no mala fide intentions. (Para 13)
Facts of the case:
The appellant filed an RTI application seeking details about a public tender related to railway land managed by the RLDA and highlighted the failure of the CPIO to provide relevant information or to transfer the queries as per the RTI Act, prompting a second appeal.
Findings of Court:
The Commission ordered the CPIOs to address compliance with the RTI request and explained the operational loopholes regarding the transfer of applications.
Issues: The main issue was whether the CPIO properly handled the RTI application and complied with the provisions of the RTI Act regarding communication with related authorities.
Ratio Decidendi: The Commission noted that the CPIO failed to transfer relevant parts of the RTI request under section 6(3), leading to further directives for ensuring compliance in future - The absence during the earlier hearings was noted but found justifiable given circumstances.
Result: The show cause notice is dropped.
702-B, 7th Floor, Konnectus Tower-2, DMRC Building, Ajmeri Gate, New Delhi - 110002 ….(cid:29)ितवादीगण /Respondent Date of Hearing : 03.01.2024 Date of Decision : 15.01.2024 Date of SCN Hearing : 30.06.2025 Date of SCN Decision : 02.07.2025 INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 05-06-2023 CPIO replied on : 07-06-2023 First appeal filed on : 12-06-2023 First Appellate Authority’s order : Not on record
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : NIL Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 05.06.2023 seeking the following information:
“Regarding Tender No.: 4 of RLDA/RFP/CD-39/CRD-2021 Give the following details in respect of the above-mentioned public tender:
A. Please clearly mention the width of the road as on the date of auction. Share the details of the road like who owns the road till date of the road? What is the width of the road, is it an internal railway road or is it a public road?
B. Please clearly mention the width of the road for the plot auctioned on
5/6/20237.
C: Please confirm whether the said land had a temple on the date of auction?
D: Please confirm as on 5/6/2023 whether the temple is present on the auctioned plot? Must share the picture of the said temple on the land auctioned by RLDA.
E: Please confirm whether any communication has ever been made from the date of auction by RLDA to your office? If yes, then how many emails/ letters/communications have been made so far please share in tabular form date subject officer name and designation written by and written to.
F: Please confirm whether DILR measurement has been done for the auctioned plot, if yes, share the date of measurement, measurement sheet and other details.
G: Please confirm whether the process of handing over the land was initiated by the office of DRAM Rajkot if yes, share the communication made with RDLA and whether the process of handing over is complete?
H. Kindly confirm whether office of DRM Rajkot has received any money from RLDA from the above auctioned plot and if so, give details thereof.
I: Please confirm whether the above auctioned plot consist of any stretch of government land which is not owned by the Railways? if the answer to this question is yes, then give details of the area of the land in square meters which does not belong to the Railways and was still auctioned by RLDA?
J: Please confirm whether the land auctioned by RLDA is on 12 Mtr road? If not, please give details of difference in road width mentioned by RLDA in auction document and as per divisional records.”
The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 07.06.2023 stating as under:
“With reference to the above subject, it is to inform you sir that the information asked by you are not pertaining to Western Railway, Rajkot Division. It is the matter of RLDA. You are requested to contact RLDA for the desired information.
It is also informed that if you are not satisfied with the information given herein, you can appeal to Additional Divisional Railway Manager, Western Railway, Rajkot.”
Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 12.06.2023. The FAA’s order is not on record.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
“Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing on 03.01.2024:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Present Respondent: Absent The appellant inter alia submitted that information sought pertained to a site owned by the Western Railways, Rajkot Division which was the subject matter of a tender published vide Tender No. 4 of RLDA/RFP/CD- 39/CRD-2021, dated 17/09/2021. The said tender was published through the agency of the Railways Land Development Authority (RLDA), which is a statutory authority set up in 2006 under the aegis of Ministry of Railways through which the Railway divisions put up their vacant lands and colonies for development and redevelopment with participation of private developers. He further submitted that the resp
