Central Information Commission
Mrkhitish Chandra Dash vs Coal India Limited on 7 November, 2014
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
ROOM NO. 329, SECOND FLOOR, C-WING
August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place,
New Delhi-110066
Tel. No. 91-11-26717356
F.No.CIC/SS/A/2013/001282-YA
Date of Hearings : 22.09.2014 & 28.10.2014
Date of Interim Decision : 22.09.2014
Date of Final Decision : 07.11.2014
Appellant : Shri Khitish Chandra Dash
Odisha
Respondent : Shri Bijay Swaroop, CPIO/GM(Pers.)
Shri T.K. Mukherjee, GM(CP)
Shri S. Majumdar
Coal India Limited
Kolkata
Information Commissioner : Shri Yashovardhan Azad
Relevant fact emerging from appeal:
RTI Application filed on : 29.10.2012
PIO replied on : 08.11.2012 & 13.12.2012
First Appeal filed on : 26.12.2012
First Appellate Authority (FAA) order on : 09.01.2013
Second Appeal received on : 09.04.2013
Information sought:
The appellant sought copies of Coal India Limited letters sent to Ministry of Coal for allocation of coal blocks in 2008 & 2011 and replies of Ministry of Coal from 2008 till date. Relevant facts emerging during hearing: 22.09.2014 Both the parties are present. The appellant has sought the above information by filing an RTI application dated 29.10.2012. PIO/GM(Pers) in his reply, denied information stating that the same involves the issue of commercial confidence and trade secrets which would harm the competitive position of the third party and is exempted from disclosure u/s 8(1)(d). The FAA in his order upheld the decision of the PIO.
The respondent stated that information was earlier denied u/s 8(1)(d), however, the matter was further deliberated with the higher authorities and the same being under investigation by the CBI, it cannot be provided even under Section 8(1)(h).
On a query by the Commission as to what exactly these letters written to the Ministry of Coal are, the respondent stated that the letters relate to details of coal blocks that the CIL would like to mine. On another query as to number of letters involved, the respondent stated that only two letters were written to the Ministry in this regard.
Interim Decision: 22.09.2014 After hearing the respondent, the Commission is not able to comprehend the respondent's submission and directs the CPIO to personally appear before the Commission on October 28, 2014 at 10.45 AM along with the two letters, as mentioned by the CPIO above, for inspection. The respondent is also directed to furnish written submission clearly explaining how information cannot be provided u/s 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act.
Relevant facts emerging during hearing: 28.10.2014 The respondents are present. CPIO produced the said letters before the Commission and the same have been perused. The letters consists of CIL's considered opinions regarding Coal Block Allocation, which blocks CIL would like to mine and which blocks are open for private participation. The respondent stated that CBI's scope of inquiry is very large, i.e. the blocks allocated since 1993 are under scrutiny.
On query by the Commission whether all coal blocks allocated since then are under scrutiny, the respondent stated that some of them might not be, however, ascertaining the blocks which are not under scrutiny is very difficult as CBI cannot be asked each and every time such an RTI application is received. He stated that this is the reason why they have invoked the exemption u/s 8(1)(h). He further stated if this information is disclosed in the public domain, it will not only affect the said inquiry, but would give rise to several such RTI applications.
The respondent stated that they are relying on the recent judgement by the Supreme Court regarding the allocation of coal blocks in WP(Cr.) 120/2012 & WP(C) 463/2012, 515/2012 & 283/2012, wherein the court has held enquiry regarding some coal blocks has been completed but for some, it will be continued.
Final Decision: 07.11.2014 After hearing the respondent and on perusal of record, it is clear that the copies of letters sought by the appellant cannot be provided to him as the enquiry is pending for some coal blocks. Also, the respondent's plea that blocks which are not under scrutiny cannot be ascertained as the respondent authority cannot ask CBI each and every time such an RTI application is received, is also accepted.
The question before the Commission is whether disclosure of requested information would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders. It would be expedient to extract clause (h) of section 8 (1) which reads as follows:-
"8. Exemption from disclosure of information- (1) notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen,-
...(h) Information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders;"
From a plain reading of the above provision, it follows that Section 8(1) (h) of the RTI Act exempts disclosure of information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders. In the instant case, the CPIO has established that if the said letters are laid out in the public domain, it would impede the process of investigation, in the sense that it would open floodgates for other potential information seekers and will invite a spate of such applications.
Further, disclosure of the said letters (as demanded in this case by the appellant) even before the competent authority's decision, i.e. CBI and Supreme Court, will expose not only that authority but the respondent authority too, to competing pressures which may hamper cool reflection on the report and compromise objectivity of their decision-making.
In view of the above, the information cannot be provided as the respondent's plea u/s 8(1)(h) is upheld.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
(Yashovardhan Azad) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against application and payment of the charges prescribed under the Act to the CPIO of this Commission.
(B.D. Harit) Deputy Secretary & Deputy Registrar