Information in respect of 34 contracts refused u/s 8(1)(h) and 8(1)(b) – PIO: appellant is a contractor who has been black-listed by the department - CIC: mere pendency of arbitration proceedings is not sufficient justification for withholding information
16 Oct, 2013Information sought:
The appellant filed an RTI application seeking following information:
(i) Subject matter of information: Estimate registers of sanctioned estimates for years 01-02; 02-03; 03-04; 04-05; 05-06.
(ii) The period of which the information relates: Year 2001 to 2006
(iii) Description of the information required; copies of estimate registers maintained at A.O. Works E1 of MTNL Mumbai for the sanctioned estimates of DGHE/DGHW/DENNR/DEGOD Units for years 01-02; 02-03; 03-04; 04-05; 05-06.
(iv) This information is required in person. He has also filed 34 RTI applications seeking identical information in respect of 34 contracts (mentioned below) awarded in the year 2003:
Contract Numbers:
1- 555/MJ/2886/DENNR/RH/SI/03-04 2- 555/MJ/2752/DGHW/RH/SI/03-04. 3555/MJ/2901/DGHE/RH/SI/03-04. 4- 555/MJ/3015/DGHE/RH/SI/04-05. 5- GME1/Mtce/4495/DENNR GOD/SI/06-07 6- GME1/Mtce/4213/12/DDGHE/SI/05-06 7- 555/MJ/2963/DGHW/RH/SI/03-04. 8- GME1/Mtce/4163/DENNR/SI/03-04. 9- GME1/Mtce/4388/DENNR & GOD/SI/05-06 10-555/MJ/2770/DGHW/RH/SI/03-04. 11-GME1/Mtce/4222/DEGOD/SI/04-05 12-555/MJ/2932/DEGOD/RH/SI/03-04. 13-555/MJ/2808/DGHE/RH/SI/02-03. 14-555/MJ/2747/AGHW/RH/SI/02-03 15-555/MJ/3014/DGHE/RH/SI/04-05 16-555/MJ/4227/DGHE/RH/SI/04-05 17-555/MJ/4213/DGHW/RH/SI/03-04 18-555/MJ/4607/DGHW/RH/SI/01-02 19-555/MJ/2770/DGHW/RH/SI/03-04 20-555/MJ/2938/DGHW/RH/SI/03-04 21-555/MJ/2939/DEGOD/RH/SI/03-04 22-555/MJ/2936/DGHW/RH/SI/03-04 23-555/MJ/2965/DEGOD/RH/SI/03-04 24-555/MJ/2937/DGHW/RH/SI/03-04 25-555/MJ/2781/DGHW/RH/SI/02-03 26-555/MJ/2762/DGHW/RH/SI/02-03 27-555/MJ/4214/DGHW/RH/SI/03-04 28-555/MJ/4388/DGHW/RH/SI/03-04 29-555/MJ/2793/DGHW/RH/SI/02-03 30-GME1/Mtce/4126/007/DGHE/SI/04-05 31-555/MJ/2871/DENNR/RH/SI/03-04 32-555/MJ/3016/DGHW/RH/SI/04-05 33-555/MJ/2867/DENNR/SI/03-04 34-555/MJ/2846/DGHW/RH/SI/03-04
Information sought: -
(a) Sanctioned copy of estimate referred (i) above with Specification, Justification, Diagrams, Survey sheets attached to it.
(b) Copy of indent sent for collection of materials with copy of gate pass through which materials were received.
(c) Copy of work orders issued by the SDE for carrying out the works in this estimates.
(d) Copy of requisition received for materials issued for execution of the works in this estimate & copy of gate pass issued for taking out the material.
(e) Total expenditure incurred in this estimate under the head stores, labour & cash till date. (v) This information is required in person.
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
The PIO has refused the information under 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; 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.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing: The following were present
Appellant: Mr. Pravin J. Chheda
Respondent: Mr. Nand Lal Sachdev CPIO
The CPIO stated that the appellant is a contractor who has been black-listed by the department in the year 2007 and various disputes regarding his payments are presently before the Arbitrator and hence the information sought by him is exempt under 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; 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. He further stated that it can be seen that the appellant is seeking huge and voluminous information and compiling the same would disproportionately divert the resources of the public authority. The appellant contested stating that the exemption claimed by the respondent is incorrect as no investigation / prosecution is presently in progress and as per Section 8(1)(b) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which has been expressly forbidden to be published by any court of law or tribunal or the disclosure of which may constitute contempt of court; of the RTI Act only that information which has been expressly forbidden by any court of law or tribunal can be denied. He further pleaded that though there are 35 appeals but he does not need much information and if he is allowed to inspect the relevant files he can easily identify the documents needed by him. The CPIO stated that he has no objection in allowing the inspection provided the information is disclosable.
Decision notice:
The mere pendency of arbitration proceedings is not sufficient justification by itself for withholding the information. The RTI Act provides no exemption from disclosure requirement for sub-judice matters. The only exemption in sub-judice matter is regarding what has been expressly forbidden by a court or a tribunal and what may constitute contempt of court. In view of the foregoing the denial of information under 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; 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 cannot be sustained. Hence, as stated by the CPIO he should allow the appellant to inspect the relevant records relating to his aforesaid 35 RTI applications within 45 days from the date of receipt of this order. The appellant should also be permitted to take photocopies/extract therefrom subject to the payment of the prescribed fee.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
BASANT SETH
Information Commissioner
Citation: Mr. Pravin J. Chheda v. MTNL in File No. CIC/BS/A/2012/001451, 001452, 001453, 001454, 001481, 001482, 001483, 001484, 001485, 001486, 001487, 001488, 001489, 001490, 001491, 001492, 001493, 001494, 001495, 001496, 001497,001498, 001499, 001500, 001501, 001502, 001503, 001504, 001505, 001506, 001507, 001508, 001509, 001510, 001511/3573