Information relating to GTL Infrastructure Ltd - being a private entity they are not covered under RTI regime - DoT is the licensing authority and whatever information are available with DoT relating to tower installed by the company should be provided
1- What is the name and address of CPIO at GTL Infrastructure Limited, Branch Office, Lucknow?
2- What is the name and address of CPIO at GTL Infrastructure Limited, Registered Office, Mumbai? 3- What are the responsibilities of Agreement Holder as per Agreement no. UPE/GBT/A/01832.
4- What are the responsibilities of Landlord as per Agreement no. UPE/GBT/A/01832.
5- Copy of rules and responsibilities vested as per Agreement no. UPE/GBT/A/01832.
6- What is the expenditure and budget under Agreement no. UPE/GBT/A/01832.
7- Details of rent being paid to Landlord as per rules.
8- Provide name of all the landlords with whom agreements have been done.
9- Name of the guard appointed at tower no. UPE/GBT/A/01832.
10-How many security guards have been changed for tower no.UPE/GBT/A/01832?
11-How the landlord is informed when a security guard is changed?
12-For how many months rent to landlord has not been paid for Agreement no. UPE/GBT/A/01832. 13-Why original copy of agreements are not available with landlord.
Grounds for the Second Appeal: The PIO has not given the complete and satisfactory information. Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing: The following were present
Appellant: Mr. Devesh Dubey through VC 9452785105 Respondent: Mr. M K Rao CPIO M: 9868134049 DoT, Mr. D P S Rajesh CPIO TRAI The CPIO, DoT stated that the appellant is asking for various information relating to GTL Infrastructure Ltd, which is a private company and they do not hold any such information with them. He pointed out that the appellant is, inter alia, asking for information about the CPIO of the company and it is obvious that being a private entity they are not covered under the RTI regime. The appellant argued that the DoT is the licensing authority and the information can be accessed by them. The CPIO contested stating that the DoT only approves site clearance and is not the licensing authority for such companies. The appellant stated that at least whatever information/documents are available with the DoT relating to the tower installed by the company on his land should be provided. The CPIO stated that he will furnish the documents provided the appellant gives the correct address of the site. The appellant stated that he will give the correct address and also provide a copy of the soil testing report to enable the CPIO to identify the tower. Decision notice: As agreed by the CPIO he should furnish the information as above within 7 days from the date the appellant furnishes the correct site address of the tower. The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Citation: Mr. Devesh Dubey v. SACFA Sectt., Telecom Regulatory Authority of India in File No. CIC/BS/A/2012/000308/3177