Copy of joint venture of India bull Commodity Exchange with MMTC – CIC: the terms of the Agreement relates to commercial confidence of the public authority, the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of the third party and is exempt u/s 8
4 Sep, 2013Order
1. The instant case was heard by the Commission on 29.1.2013 and the Commission vide its order of even number dated 8.2.2013 held as follows:
“As for as information on Point No. 9 & 10 of the RTI application is concerned, the Commission vide its Division Bench order dated 22.2.2010 in the matter of Shri P.P. Rajeev Vs. Cochin Port Trust in case No. CIC/AT/A/2008/00707 held as follows:
“32. We, therefore, reiterate that there cannot be an omnibus order about the disclosure of all immovable assets related information of employees of public authorities. The Government or the public authorities may frame rules about disclosure of this class of information held by them as filed by their employees, but till such time as these Rules are framed and, the condition of confidentiality in which such information is handed over to the public authority holds good, the request for their disclosure will have to be considered on a case by case basis under the provisions of Sections 8(1)(j) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information: Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person. Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information: Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person. Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information: Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person. Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information: Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person. and 11(1) Where a Central Public Information Officer or a State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, intends to disclose any information or record, or part thereof on a request made under this Act, which relates to or has been supplied by a third party and has been treated as confidential by that third party, the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, shall, within five days from the receipt of the request, give a written notice to such third party of the request and of the fact that the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, intends to disclose the information or record, or part thereof, and invite the third party to make a submission in writing or orally, regarding whether the information should be disclosed, and such submission of the third party shall be kept in view while taking a decision about disclosure of information: Where a Central Public Information Officer or a State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, intends to disclose any information or record, or part thereof on a request made under this Act, which relates to or has been supplied by a third party and has been treated as confidential by that third party, the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, shall, within five days from the receipt of the request, give a written notice to such third party of the request and of the fact that the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, intends to disclose the information or record, or part thereof, and invite the third party to make a submission in writing or orally, regarding whether the information should be disclosed, and such submission of the third party shall be kept in view while taking a decision about disclosure of information: of the Act. Similarly it shall be open to any public authority or the Government to voluntarily undertake to disclose this variety of information, fully or in part.” Consistent with the aforementioned of the Division Bench of the Commission, the case is remitted back to the CPIO (Vig), MMTC, with the direction that he will consider this matter under the provisions of Section 8(1)(j) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information: Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person. Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information: Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person. Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information: Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person. Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information: Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person. and/or Section 11(1) Where a Central Public Information Officer or a State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, intends to disclose any information or record, or part thereof on a request made under this Act, which relates to or has been supplied by a third party and has been treated as confidential by that third party, the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, shall, within five days from the receipt of the request, give a written notice to such third party of the request and of the fact that the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, intends to disclose the information or record, or part thereof, and invite the third party to make a submission in writing or orally, regarding whether the information should be disclosed, and such submission of the third party shall be kept in view while taking a decision about disclosure of information: Where a Central Public Information Officer or a State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, intends to disclose any information or record, or part thereof on a request made under this Act, which relates to or has been supplied by a third party and has been treated as confidential by that third party, the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, shall, within five days from the receipt of the request, give a written notice to such third party of the request and of the fact that the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, intends to disclose the information or record, or part thereof, and invite the third party to make a submission in writing or orally, regarding whether the information should be disclosed, and such submission of the third party shall be kept in view while taking a decision about disclosure of information: of the RTI Act and then take a view as enjoined by either or both sections, which shall be communicated to the appellant in response to his query at Point No. 9 and 10 of the RTI application within four weeks of receipt of this order. On Point No. 2 of the RTI application, the CPIO/GM(P) is hereby directed to provide an opportunity to the appellant for inspection of the register regarding Corporate Gifts and take copies of documents identified by the appellant on payment of requisite fees, within three weeks of receipt of this order. As far as providing information on Point No. 12 of the RTI application regarding providing copy of ICEX-MMTC JV MOU, is concerned, the CPIO/GM (Agro), MMTC was directed the attend the hearing on 22.05.2013 at 11.00 a.m. On remaining points the reply of the respondent is upheld”.
BACKGROUND:
2. The appellant, through his RTI application dated 11.4.2012 sought information on twelve queries on a number of matters. Shri Sanjay Kaul, GM/Vig/ CPIO vide letter No. I/480/08/Vig/1550 dated 25.4.2012 denied information on the queries at Point No. 9 and 10 of the RTI application which were regarding IPR of S/Shri Rajeev Jaideva, Director (P) and Sanjeev Batra, Ex-CMD, under the provisions of Section 8(1)(j) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information: Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person. Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information: Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person. Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information: Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person. Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information: Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person. of the RTI Act. Shri Suraj Modi, GM (Agro)/CPIO vide letter No. MMTC/Agro/Pulses/RTI/2012-13 dated 2.5.2012 replied to Point No. 12 of the RTI application by which the appellant requested for a copy of the final MOU (Share Participating interest) signed by MMTC with Indiabull Commodity Exchange (CCEX). This information was denied by the CPIO in terms of Section 8(1)(d) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information including commercial confidence, trade secrets or intellectual property, the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of a third party, unless the competent authority is satisfied that larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information including commercial confidence, trade secrets or intellectual property, the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of a third party, unless the competent authority is satisfied that larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; of the RTI Act. The GM (Vig) through his letter dated 9.5.2012, in reply to Point No. 1 of the RTI application informed the appellant that the matter was under investigation and that any information relating to this case cannot be provided at this stage in terms of Section 8(1)(h) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; of the RTI Act.
3. The appellant filed first appeal on 14.5.2012 before the FAA on the grounds that information on Point No. 1, 2, 9, 10 and 12 has not been provided by the concerned CPIOs. The FAA vide his order No. 14/146/AA/38/12 dated 13.6.2012 disposed of appellant’s first appeal as follows:
“On perusal of replies dated 25th April, 2nd May, 9th May and 11th May, 2012 of the concerned CPIOs as also the contentions of the appellant in his appeal dated 14.5.2012. Regarding query No. 1 (report/notings) submitted by Director (Finance) in connection with canteen issue to CVO, CPIO (Vigilance) had replied that the information at this stage cannot be provided u/s 8(1)(h) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; since the matter is under investigation. The CPIO has rightly declined to give information u/s 8(1)(h) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; ;
Regarding query No. 2, the CPIO/GM(P) had replied that the register maintained in Protocol Division can be inspected under provisions of RTI Act. The CPIO has, therefore, no declined to give information as contended by the appellant; Regarding query No. 9 and 10 (property and asset details) of Mr. Rajeev Jaideva, Director (P) and Mr. Sanjiv Batra, Ex-CMD, CPIO/GM (Vig) has declined to give information u/s 8(1)(j) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information: Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person. Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information: Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person. Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information: Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person. Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information: Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person. of the RTI Act. CPIO has rightly declined to give information as the information relating to personal assets of these officers is personal information, the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest and disclosure will cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual. In any case MMTC being a Public Sector Company has a system in place where every officer is required to give statement of his assets to the Vigilance Division on annual basis; Regarding query No.12, Copy of ICEX-MMTC JV MOU, the CPIO/GM(Agro) has declined to give information u/s 8(1)(d) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information including commercial confidence, trade secrets or intellectual property, the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of a third party, unless the competent authority is satisfied that larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information including commercial confidence, trade secrets or intellectual property, the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of a third party, unless the competent authority is satisfied that larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; . The CPIO has rightly declined to give information as the said document contains information including commercial confidence etc. the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of third party i.e. joint venture partner”.
4. As per Commission’s aforementioned Interim Order dated 8.2.2013, the General Manager (Agro)/CPIO, MMTC was heard on 22.5.2013 in respect of Point No. 12 of the RTI application regarding providing copy of Indiabull Commodity Exchange (ICEX)-MMTC JV MOU to the appellant. The CPIO during the hearing reiterates that information sought by the appellant is related to trade and business of the public authority, which is of commercial confidence and disclosure of this information to the appellant would harm the competitive position of the third party and MMTC. Even as per terms of agreement between the parties, the terms of the Agreement cannot be disclosed to third parties other than with prior written consent of the 2nd Partner – Indiabull Commodity Exchange. The CPIO submits that the MOU or shareholders agreement is for setting up ICEX and Private Commodity Exchanges could take advantage if terms of the MOU is disclosed.
5. Having considered aforementioned submissions of the CPIO, the Commission is of the view that the information as sought for by the appellant at Point No. 12 of the RTI application relates to commercial confidence, trade secrets of the public authority, the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of the third party the respondent and disclosure of which is exempted under the provisions of Section 8(1)(d) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information including commercial confidence, trade secrets or intellectual property, the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of a third party, unless the competent authority is satisfied that larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information including commercial confidence, trade secrets or intellectual property, the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of a third party, unless the competent authority is satisfied that larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; of the RTI Act. Moreover, the appellant has failed to establish any larger public interest, which warrants the disclosure of such information. The reply of the CPIO is upheld. The matter is disposed of on the part of the Commission.
(Sushma Singh)
Information Commissioner
Citation: Shri Bhupinder Kumar v. MMTC Ltd. in Case No. CIC/SS/A/2012/002676