Should the mandatory approvals received for the Special Economic Zone be disclosed under RTI?

Background

The appellant filed an application under the Right to Information (RTI) Act with the Kandla Port Trust (KPT) seeking copy of proposed plan for Multi Product Special Economic Zone (MPSEZ), suggestions and comments received by concerned authorities on the said proposed plan and the feasibility study report done by concerned authorities regarding the said proposed plan. The Public Information Officer (PIO) requested the appellant to remit Rs. 722/- towards further fees on account of supply of information. The appellant deposited the required fee. Later the PIO informed the appellant that KPT has recently come to know about the stay orders passed for the land on which PBMPSEZ is going to be developed. The PIO stated that as the matter was under judicial consideration before the appellate Court, the information could not be disclosed and the fees of Rs. 722/- paid by the appellant would be refunded in due course.

Proceedings

During the hearing the before Central Information Commission (CIC), the appellant stated that the respondent have denied information without proper and bona-fide reason. The PIO submitted that KPT is a Government Organization, wherein the proposed project of setting up of SEZ has been taken up. This project is an ambitious Port Project of National importance which would provide employment to 1.50 lakhs persons and there were certain vested interest groups who do not want this SEZ Project to be implemented at KPT and these groups are using various tactics to stall the project. The PIO provided a copy of the stay order passed by the Honourable Apex Court. He explained that the facts have been twisted and misrepresented and raised in the National Green Tribunal, to jeopardize the setting up SEZ Project. Hence the requisite information/ documents were exempted from disclosure under 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, as the disclosure would harm the competitive position of  third party.

View of CIC

The Commission noted that the respondent have no disclosure obligation in terms 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 as the information sought for is related to commercial confidence, trade secrets or intellectual property and the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of the respondent. However, the Commission directed the PIO to provide copies of mandatory approvals received for the Project, including environment clearance obtained from Ministry of Environment and Forests in respect of the aforementioned Project, to the appellant.

Citation: Mr. Dushyant J. Pandya v. Kandla Port Trust in Case No. CIC/SS/A/2012/002057