Rail Neer scam row: CIC questions IRCTC’s refusal to share RTI information

The Central Information Commission (CIC) has pulled up the Indian Railway Catering and Tourism Corporation (IRCTC) for denying information under the RTI Act about whether companies bidding for railway tenders had disclosed their alleged links to the Rail Neer scam and related investigations by central agencies.

The RTI applicant had asked IRCTC whether bidders participating in railway tenders had clearly mentioned if cases by the CBI or Enforcement Directorate (ED) were registered against them. The request aimed to check whether companies had openly declared their alleged involvement in the controversial Rail Neer corruption case while submitting tender documents.

The Rail Neer scam , investigated by the Central Bureau of Investigation in 2015 , involved private catering contractors supplying cheap bottled water instead of the official “Rail Neer” brand on premium trains such as Rajdhani and Shatabdi Express . Investigators had estimated that the practice caused losses of about ₹19.5 crore to Indian Railways .

Through the RTI application, the applicant also sought details on whether bidders disclosed that they were accused in the case , whether the CBI had registered an FIR, and if the ED had filed cases under provisions of the IPC and the Prevention of Corruption Act . The query further asked whether bidders informed authorities about developments such as raids, cash seizures, and filing of chargesheets or complaints in court.

However, IRCTC rejected the request citing Section 8(1)(d) of the RTI Act , which exempts disclosure of information related to commercial confidence or trade secrets if it could harm the competitive position of a third party.

During the hearing, the appellant argued that the information was sought in “larger public interest”, especially since it concerns companies participating in government tenders involving public funds .

Examining the case, the CIC found IRCTC’s response inadequate , observing that the authority had merely cited the exemption clause without explaining how it applied to the requested information .

The Commission noted that simply quoting an exemption provision does not amount to a valid reply under the RTI Act . It stressed that public authorities must provide clear and reasoned justification when denying information.

Calling the response deficient and not in line with RTI provisions, the CIC directed IRCTC to revisit the application and issue a fresh, reasoned reply.