Copy of the Show Cause Notice/Order issued u/s 206(4) of the Companies Act by the Registrar of Companies to the ICICI Prudential Life Insurance Company Ltd & others - CIC issued an advisory u/s 25(5) of RTI Act to the FAA to expedite the investigation
15 May, 2020Information Sought:
The appellant has sought a copy of the Show Cause Notice/Order issued u/s 206(4) of the Companies Act by the Registrar of Companies, Mumbai to the ICICI Prudential Life Insurance Company Limited and other concerns for serious violation of various sections of the Companies Act against the interest of the stake holders.
Grounds for Second Appeal
The CPIO did not provide the desired information.
Submissions made by Appellant and Respondent during Hearing:
The appellant submitted that he is not satisfied with the reply of the CPIO. He further submitted that he is not satisfied as the first appeal was also not disposed of. Furthermore, he pressed for the disclosure of the information sought as matter is related to public interest. He summed up stating that he being the complainant is entitled to be apprised of the reply provided by the companies but the same were denied for the reasons best known to the respondents.
The CPIO submitted that the outcome of the first appeal was not traceable and the then FAA, Shri R.D Gupta has also retired. He further stated that the latest status is that the inquiry u/s 206(4) of the Companies Act is underway and hence cannot be disclosed being exempted 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; of the RTI Act. The CPIO also added that after the inquiry is over then only the documents can be given. He further submitted that the Applicant has filed 24 RTI applications and 8 Appeals on the same subject, for which the respondent is providing information to the appellant from time to time. The inquiry u/s. 206 of the Companies Act, 2013 ordered by the Ministry on 16.04.2018 is underway. Hence as per 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 information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders is not obligated to be provided. Hence, the sought for information cannot be provided.
Observations:
At the outset it is relevant to mention here that it was highly incorrect that the first appeal was not disposed of. The then FAA has failed in his duty and dealt with the first appeal very casually, which is why a speaking order was not passed. The present FAA is advised to be careful in future regarding pending first appeals and ensure that first appeals are disposed of as per the mandate of the RTI Act. The CPIO’s plea that at this juncture the documents cannot be given due to pendency of the complaint is accepted, though the Commission is not denying the fact that the appellant has raised a public interest issue. It is also relevant to mention here that though the complaint was filed by the appellant but impediment of investigation cannot be ruled out. To ensure fair investigation the system has to be upheld.
Decision:
Based on a perusal of the record, it was noted that an appropriate reply was given by the CPIO on time and denial at this juncture was also well justified. The Commission would not like to therefore intervene in the process of inquiry of the respondents and also accepts the CPIO’s plea that once the inquiry is over the information shall be provided to the appellant. However, an advisory is issued u/s 25(5) of the RTI Act to the FAA to coordinate with the concerned officials to expedite the process of investigation so that the matter can reach a logical conclusion within a reasonable time period.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Vanaja N. Sarna
Information Commissioner
Citation: Rajiv Agarwal v. O/o Registrar of Companies in Decision no.: CIC/ROCMU/A/2018/637393/03288, Date of Decision: 23/04/2020