Information relating to one’s own vigilance case, G.C. meeting minutes denied u/s 8(1)(h) and 8(1)(d) - Madhvan report was claimed to be not available - CIC: provide a copy of Madhavan report or conduct an enquiry and apprise the outcome
30 Oct, 2013Information relating to one’s own vigilance case, G.C. meeting minutes and Madhvan Report (report submitted by Jt. Director of CBI to ARAI) - information was denied 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; and 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; , Madhvan report was claimed to be not available - CIC directed to provide a copy of Madhavan report and if the said report is not traceable, the PIO will conduct an enquiry and apprise the appellant of the outcome of the enquiry
ORDER
1. The appellant through his RTI application dated 27.8.2012 sought information on the following three queries:
“(1) All documents i.e. all information on record relating to his case with the CVO (letter from Vigilance Section Heavy Industries, say given by CVO N.V. Marathe and the findings sent by Vig. Section, Heavy Industries);
(2) G.C. meeting minutes of 16th July, 1999; and
(3) Madhvan Report (Jt. Director of CBI K. Madhvan came to ARAI in the month of January, 1999, made an enquiry at Directors and DD(AH) Office and submitted his report called the Madhvan report”.
The CPIO vide letter No. RTI/PIO/12-13/20 dated 26.9.2012 denied information on Point No. 1 by applying the provisions 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; a copy of the Minutes of the meeting of the G.C. requested at Point No. 2 was denied 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 and on Point No. 3 the appellant was informed that the Institute does not have the Madhavan Report. He was advised to approach the originator of the information.
2. Aggrieved with reply of the CPIO, the appellant filed an appeal on 17.10.2012 before the FAA. The FAA vide order No. RTI/AA/12-13/03 dated 30.10.2012 upheld the reply of the CPIO.
4. During the hearing the appellant informs the Commission that on an identical application filed by him before the CPIO, Ministry of Heavy Industries information on Point No. 1 of his RTI application has been provided to him.
3. The respondent submit during the hearing that a copy of minutes of Governing Council Meeting dated 16.7.1999 cannot be provided as the minutes of Governing Council of the Institute contain business information, which is confidential in nature and contains information in the nature of commercial confidence, the 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. Information on Point No. 3 i.e. the Madhavan Report is not available with the Institute. The FAA informs that he has provided relevant extracts from the Minutes of the G.C. Meeting dated 16.7.1999 which has been sent to the appellant vide letter dated 8.10.2013 by speed post, which the appellant states that he has not as yet received.
4. Having considered the submissions of the parties, the Commission observes that information on Point No. 1 has been provided to the appellant by the CPIO/Ministry of Heavy Industries, on an identical application filed by the appellant. With regard to the information requested at Point No. 2 of the RTI application, the CPIO to provide the appellant with a copy of the Madhavan report, unless its disclosure attracts any of the exemption clauses of the RTI Act, which the CPIO will decide by passing a speaking order. If the said report is still not traceable, the CPIO will conduct an enquiry why Madhvan Report is not available with the ARAI and apprise the appellant of the outcome of the enquiry. The CPIO will comply with the directions of the Commission within four weeks of receipt of this order. The matter is disposed of on the part of the Commission with above directions/observations.
(Sushma Singh)
Information Commissioner
Citation: Shri K.D. Suri v. The Automotive Research Association of India in Case No. CIC/SS/A/2013/000241