CIC: Reply furnished by the Respondent is not meticulous; Explore the viability of updating information pertaining to list of petrol pumps functioning all over India and related issues regarding land requirement for allotment of petrol pump on website

Information sought and background of the case:

The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 06.05.2023 seeking information on following points:-

1 “Kindly provide the List of Petrol Pump Functioning in URBAN Area of District Bareilly.

2 Kindly intimate land requirements with layout of one Pump and More than Pumps functioning in Petrol Pump.

3 Kindly intimate the Pumps which not fulfilled the Land Requirements and in Operational Condition in URBAN area of District Bareilly.

4 Kindly intimate the Pumps which fulfilled the Land Requirements and in Operational Condition in URBAN area of District Bareilly.”

The CPIO, Indian Oil Corporation Limited (IOCL), Mumbai vide letter dated 19.05.2023 replied as under:-

उत्तर 1-4 : प्रार्थी द्वारा चाही गई सूचना का जनहित से कोई संबंध स्थापित नहीं किया गया है और न ही कोई संबंध प्रतीत होता है। अतः, जैसा कि माननीय दिल्ली उच्च न्यायालय ने वाद संख्या WP@803/2009 Vijay Prakash बनाम UOI एवं अन्य में पारित आदेश दिनांक 01/07/2009 तथा माननीय केंद्रीय सूचना आयोग ने अपील संख्या CIC/LS/C/2012/000502/SH में पारित आदेश दिनांक 05/06/2014 में प्रतिपादित किया है, प्रार्थी का मूल आवेदन इसी आधार पर खारिज किए जाने योग्य है।

साथ ही, यह अपेक्षा की जाती है कि कोई भी आवेदक एक आवेदन पत्र के माध्यम से केवल एक ही बिंदु पर सूचना इस उद्देश्य से मांगे कि वह सूचना संबंधित जन सूचना अधिकारी के पास तैयार अवस्था में उपलब्ध है। यहाँ यह स्पष्ट करना आवश्यक है कि जन सूचना अधिकारी, सूचना का अधिकार अधिनियम के अंतर्गत किसी भी प्रकार की व्यक्तिगत राय देने या किसी शिकायत के निपटारे हेतु बाध्य नहीं है। इस संदर्भ में प्रार्थी माननीय केंद्रीय सूचना आयोग द्वारा अपील संख्या CIC/OK/C/2008/00597 एवं A/2008/00736 में पारित आदेश दिनांक 02/01/2009 का भी अवलोकन कर सकता है।

अतिरिक्त रूप से, सूचना का अधिकार अधिनियम के अंतर्गत “question and answer session” या quizzing of information का कोई प्रावधान नहीं है। इस संबंध में प्रार्थी माननीय केंद्रीय सूचना आयोग द्वारा पारित आदेश संख्या Decision No.552/IC(A)/2007 (F.Nos.CIC/MA/A/2006/00883 to 00885) दिनांक 15/01/2007 का भी अवलोकन कर सकता है।

Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 23.05.2023. The FAA vide order dated 30.05.2023 upheld the reply of CPIO.

Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.

Written submission dated 26.04.2025 has been received from the Appellant and same has been taken on record for perusal.

Written submission dated 30.04.2025 has been received from the CPIO and same has been taken on record for perusal. The relevant extract whereof is as under:

“..1. That in response to the contents of paragraph 1 to 4 of the RTI application, it is humbly submitted that since the appellant has not disclosed the public interest warranting disclosure of such an information, the reply was accordingly submitted by the answering respondent. However, retail outlet selection related information can be accessed through the OMC/Corporation's website 'petrolpumpdealerchayanportal In view of the above, there is no denial of information, therefore, it is prayed that this Hon'ble Commission may kindly be pleased to dispose of the instant appeal accordingly.

2. That it is further submitted that it was and is the endeavor of Indian Oil Corporation Ltd to implement RTI Act 2005 in letter and spirit and is bound by the provisions of the same Act towards furtherance of its provisions. We have always tried to satisfy the queries of RTI Applicant.”

Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:

Appellant: Present through video-conferencing.

Respondent: Mr. Alok Shrivastav, GM(Retail)- participated in the hearing.

The Appellant stated that the relevant information has not been furnished to him till date. He stated that the reply furnished by the PIO in response to his RTI Application is misleading and information has been intestinally denied by the PIO. He stated that denial of general information related to petrol pump functioning in urban area of district Bareilly is gross violation of provisions of RTI Act and strict action should be taken against the PIO in this regard.

The Respondent reiterated the averments made in their written submission and stated that the reply as per the provision of RTI Act has been provided to the Appellant within stipulated time frame. He stated that the retail outlet selection related information can be accessed through the OMC/Corporation's website 'petrolpumpdealerchayanportal.

Decision:

Commission, after perusal of case records and submissions made during hearing, observes that reply furnished by the Respondent is not meticulous. Therefore, the Commission directs the concerned PIO to revisit the instant RTI Application and provide a revised point-wise reply as available in their records, with regards to the instant RTI Application, to the appellant, free of cost via speed post, within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order and accordingly compliance report to this effect be duly sent to the Commission by the PIO. In doing so PIO must ensure that information which is exempted from disclosure under RTI Act, 2005 must not be disclosed to the Appellant and same must be redacted under section 10 of the RTI Act, 2005 prior to the said disclosure.

Further, the Commission also deems this a fit case and strongly recommends the Respondent Public Authority to explore the viability of maintaining/updating such information on their official website pertaining to list of petrol pumps functioning all over India and related issues as flagged by the Appellant in the instant matter regarding land requirement/measurement for allotment of petrol pump, in the public domain in keeping with the letter and spirit of suo motu disclosures prescribed under Section 4 of the RTI Act, so that the public have minimum resort to the use of the RTI Act to obtain the information. While proactively disclosing the information mentioned above, due caution should also be exercised by the Respondent to strictly adhere to the provisions of the RTI Act and redact any information which falls under the purview of the Section 8, and 9 of the RTI Act. No further action lies.

The appeal is disposed off accordingly.

Heeralal Samariya

Chief Information Commissioner

Citation: Shri Anand Singh Chauhan v. Indian Oil Corporation Limited (IOCL), CIC/IOCLD/A/2023/626935; Date of Decision: 07.05.2025