Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(CIC) 3601
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Vinod Kumar Tiwari, IC
P JACOB BENARJEE – Appellant
Versus
PIO, Divisional Office, Vijayawada Division, Works Branch, South Central Railway – Respondent
CIC/SCRLS/A/2024/114321
For the Appellants/Petitioners:
For the Respondents: Shri G. Nagendra Prasad
An appellant can withdraw an appeal if satisfied with the response received in an RTI application.
Headnote:The judgment concerns an RTI application filed seeking details of unauthorized installations of statues and religious structures. Following a series of submissions, the Appellant expressed satisfaction with the response provided and wished to withdraw the appeal. The court found the appeal liable to be dismissed as withdrawn.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. rti application requesting information. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. written submissions recorded. (Para 5) |
| 3. appeal dismissed as withdrawn. (Para 6 , 7) |
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka नई िद(cid:24)ी, New Delhi – 110067 File No: CIC/SCRLS/A/2024/114321 P JACOB BENARJEE .….अपीलकता(cid:18)/Appellant VERSUS बनाम PIO, Divisional Office, Vijayawada Division, Works Branch, South Central Railway, Vijayawada – 520001 ….(cid:29)ितवादीगण /Respondent Date of Hearing : 23.06.2025 Date of Decision : 26.06.2025 INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 21.11.2023 CPIO replied on : 02.01.2024 First appeal filed on : 20.01.2024 First Appellate Authority’s order : 08.02.2024 2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 04.05.2024 Information sought:
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 21.11.2023 (offline) seeking the following information:
“I may kindly be supplied with details of applications for NOCs for installation of Statutes of political, religious and communal leaders and temples, Churches and Masjids, permissions accorded and also installed without any permission in Railway land and within 30 mts from Railway boundary from Vijayawada to Kondapalli Railway Line within Vijayawada division limits.”
2. The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 02.01.2024 stating as under:
“As per the records available in this office, no such installation of statues of Political, religious and communal leaders and temples, Churches and Masjids, without permission within Railway land and within 30 mts from Railway boundary.”
3. Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 20.01.2024.
The FAA vide its order dated 08.02.2024, held as under:
“The information sought for was already furnished by the CPIO's letter dt.02.01.2024. Since you are not satisfied with the reply given by CPIO, you are requested to furnish the details of data available with you in connection with existence of installation of statues of Political, religious and communal leaders and temples, Churches and Masjids, without permission within Railway land and within 30 mts from Railway boundary so as to take suitable action as per the procedures.”
4. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Present through Video-Conference.
Respondent: Shri G. Nagendra Prasad, Assistant Divisional Engineer present through Video-Conference.
5. Written submissions of the Respondent are taken on record.
6. The Appellant, during the hearing, submitted that he is satisfied with the response given by the Respondent and now he wishes to withdraw this present second appeal.
Decision:
7. The Commission upon a perusal of records and after considering the above-mentioned submissions of the Appellant, finds liable to be dismissed as withdrawn.
Accordingly, the above-mentioned second appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.
