Mukul Chandra Vishvas vs C.P.I.O, East Central Railway

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(CIC) 4879

CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Swagat Das, INFORMATION COMMISSIONER
Mukul Chandra Vishvas – Appellant
Versus
C.P.I.O, East Central Railway – Respondent

Table of Content
1. rti procedural history and information sought. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. hearing facts and parties' contentions. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8)
3. information provided; personal exemption applies. (Para 9 , 10 , 11)
4. s.8(1)(j) text and supreme court precedents. (Para 12 , 13)
5. no opinions under rti; appeal dismissed. (Para 15 , 16)

Information sought:

1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 29-03-2024 seeking the following information:

2. The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 12-04-2024 stating as under:

3. The Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 16-05-2024. The F.A.A vide order dated 13-06-2024 stating as under:

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 Kuldeep Yadav, DEE/TRD/Danapur & APIO present through Video-Conference.

5. Proof of having served a copy of Second Appeal on Respondent while filing the same in CIC on 13.09.2024 is not available on record. Respondent confirms non-service.

6. Written submissions of the Respondent are taken on record.

7. The Appellant, during th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(Online)(CIC) 4879

CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSIONSwagat Das, INFORMATION COMMISSIONERMukul Chandra Vishvas – AppellantVersusC.P.I.O, East Central Railway – Respondent

Cases Referred (1)

CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Swagat Das, INFORMATION COMMISSIONER
Mukul Chandra Vishvas – Appellant
Versus
C.P.I.O, East Central Railway – Respondent