Copy of “Survey Sketch Map” denied u/s 8(1)(a) claiming that the mines area is the prohibited area with some vital installation inside the mines - CIC: FAA to examine the applicability of section 8(1)(a) as the information is related to past events
3 Oct, 2013ORDER
The present appeal, filed by Shri Manoranjan Patra against Mahanadi Coalfields Limited (MCL), was taken up for hearing on 12.09.2013 when the Respondents were present through Shri N.K. Ojha, CPIO and Shri D.P. Jamal, CAPIO. The Appellant was, however, not present.
Facts of the case:
2. The Appellant through his RTI application dated 09.12.2011, filed with the CPIO, MCL, Sambalpur, wanted to obtain copy of “Survey Sketch Map within 200 meters of radius from the centre point of main gate of Ananta OCP MCL on 15.09.97, before 15.09.97 and 15.09.2011.”
3. The CPIO vide his letter dated 30.12.2011 declined the disclosure of information to the Appellant citing exemption under section 8(1)(a) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information, disclosure of which would prejudicially affect the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security, strategic, scientific or economic interests of the State, relation with foreign State or lead to incitement of an offence; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information, disclosure of which would prejudicially affect the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security, strategic, scientific or economic interests of the State, relation with foreign State or lead to incitement of an offence; of the RTI Act.
4. Being dissatisfied with the reply of the CPIO, the Appellant filed a complaint before the Commission on 06.02.2012. The Commission, acting on this complaint, passed an order dated 13.06.2012 advising the Appellant to first avail of the first appellate channel below and then approach the Commission, if he is still not satisfied with the order of the First Appellate Authority.
5. The Appellant accordingly filed an appeal dated 20.07.2012 before the Appellate Authority which the Appellate Authority decided vide his order dated 03.09.2012 upholding the CPIO’s view. He recorded that “since the mines area is the prohibited area and there are some vital installation inside the mines, the sketch maps of the mines cannot be disclosed to public considering the threat to mines.”
6. The Appellant then being aggrieved by the order of the Appellate Authority filed the present appeal before the Commission.
Decision:
7. During the hearing, the Respondents submit that mines area is prohibited area and that there are some vital installations inside the mines including Magazine in which explosives are stored for mining purpose. According to them, no unauthorised person is allowed inside the mine premises for security reasons. They also express their apprehension about the misuse (like, destabilization of mining operation) of such information (mining plan). They thus plead that information in question should not be allowed to be disclosed considering the security and strategic interest of the mine.
8. Having heard the submissions of the Respondents and perused the records, the Commission observes that the information sought by the Appellant is related to the past events and that, therefore, the applicability of section 8(1)(a) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information, disclosure of which would prejudicially affect the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security, strategic, scientific or economic interests of the State, relation with foreign State or lead to incitement of an offence; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information, disclosure of which would prejudicially affect the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security, strategic, scientific or economic interests of the State, relation with foreign State or lead to incitement of an offence; in relation to the information in question needs to be reexamined in the light of the fact whether the conditions, which gave rise to the Respondents’ apprehension that disclosure of this information may prejudicially affect the security issues, are still present in the subject area or not.
9. In view of the above, the matter is hereby remanded back to the Appellate Authority with a direction that he should examine the matter denovo in the light of the observation made hereinabove and pass a speaking order in the matter within 3 weeks of receipt of this order.
10. Appeal is disposed of accordingly.
(Sushma Singh)
Information Commissioner
Citation: Shri Manoranjan Patra v. Mahanadi Coalfields Limited in Case No. CIC/SS/A/2012/003559