Railways Declares Train Fare Formula a Trade Secret, Refuses Disclosure to CIC | India News
Are you from India? 🇮🇳
👉 Check Today's Deals on Amazon IndiaIndian Railways Defends Fare Calculation as Trade Secret
Overview of the Recent CIC Decision
NEW DELHI: The Indian Railways has recently informed the Central Information Commission (CIC) that the methods used to establish train fares fall under the classification of "trade secret/intellectual property rights." Consequently, this information cannot be disclosed according to the Right to Information (RTI) Act.
The RTI Application
A public inquiry was initiated on January 25, 2024, where an application sought detailed insights into the fare calculation mechanism for train tickets. This included inquiries into dynamic pricing and the specific factors affecting fares, especially concerning the Paschim Superfast Express.
Railway Board’s Response
In response, the Chief Public Information Officer (CPIO) from the Railway Board stated that ticket prices vary by class, determined by the facilities provided. The CPIO emphasized that the classification and methodology of fare calculation are protected under trade secret laws, hence their non-disclosure serves the public interest.
Legal Justification for Non-Disclosure
The CPIO referenced Section 8(i)(d) of the RTI Act, which outlines exemptions for sensitive information, protecting not just trade secrets, but also issues relating to national security and personal privacy. Furthermore, the CIC has upheld this position in prior rulings.
Indian Railways: Balancing Commercial Utility and Social Obligations
The Indian Railways asserted that it operates as a commercial entity while simultaneously fulfilling various social responsibilities. This dual role necessitates a careful approach to fare structuring and transparency.
CIC’s Conclusion
The CIC noted that the public information officer had already disclosed all permissible information regarding general railway rating policies. It concluded that there was no need for the CPIO to create new information or interpret existing data beyond what was available. Commissioner Swagat Das determined that further intervention was unnecessary, thereby closing the case.
Source link
