NEW DELHI: The Indian Railways has told the Central Information Commission (CIC) that the classification and methodology of fixing fares of different classes in passenger train falls in the domain of “trade secret/intellectual property rights”, and therefore, cannot be disclosed under the Right to Information Act.This was disclosed while the CIC dismissed an application seeking detailed information on the base fare calculation mechanism for train tickets, including dynamic pricing and the impact of Tatkal bookings, with specific reference to Paschim Superfast Express.The online application filed on Jan 25, 2024, had asked railways to specify the components, parameters, dynamic pricing mechanisms, seasonal variations or other relevant factors influencing base fare calculation for tickets.In its reply, the central public information officer (CPIO) of the Railway Board stated that fares were charged based on class and the difference of fares in various classes was based on facilities provided. “In so far as classification and methodology of fare fixation of different classes is concerned, the policy mechanism falls in the domain of trade secret/intellectual property rights and, as such its disclosure is not considered appropriate in public interest,” the CPIO stated.The CPIO said that such information need not be shared under terms of Section 8(i)(d) of the RTl Act and added that this position had been upheld and reiterated by the Central Information Commission (CIC) in earlier orders.Section 8 of the RTI Act lists exemptions for information that does not have to be disclosed, protecting sensitive data like national security, trade secrets and personal privacy.“It is a known fact that the Indian Railways are run as a commercial utility and at the same time it being an instrumentality of state are required to discharge various social obligations in national interest,” the railways said.The commission noted that the public information officer had already provided all disclosable information and general principles of railway rating policies, and was not required to create or interpret data beyond available records.Finding no infirmity in the reply and noting the appellant’s absence during the hearing, information commissioner Swagat Das said no further intervention was required and disposed of the appeal.
