Central Information Commission
B Prathap Kumar vs National Projects Construction ... on 1 December, 2025
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
File No: CIC/NPCCL/A/2024/114971
B Prathap Kumar .....अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
The CPIO
National Projects Construction
Corp. Ltd., Plot No.-148, Sector-
44, Gurugram-122003 (Haryana). .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 26.11.2025
Date of Decision : 28.11.2025
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 15.12.2023
CPIO replied on : 29.02.2024
First appeal filed on : 03.04.2024
First Appellate Authority's order : 29.04.2024
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 14.05.2024
Information sought:
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 15.12.2023 (offline) seeking the following information:
1. Total No. of Projects under Bhubaneswar south east zone awarded by NPCC for NIPER.
2. Name of agencies whom work is awarded by NPCC in Hyderabad only with effect from 1.1.2023 till date.
3. For Hyderabad NIPER project, what is the status of all works?Page 1 of 7
File No: CIC/NPCCL/A/2024/114971
4. How many times tender pertaining to Hyderabad NIPER with PMC NPCC with effect from 1.1.2023 was called & L-1 amount in each case with name of agencies.
5. What is the Agreement between NIPER & NPCC as a PMC provide photocopy.
6. What is the date of start & date of completion of each project of NIPER work with PMC NPCC?
7. Whether drawing good for construction issued to all the projects. If so project wise details may be given.
8. Provide all minutes of meeting between NIPER & NPCC with effect from 1.1.2023 - 14.12.2023.
9. Total bill submitted project wise by contractor to NPCC & Date of amount of payment.
10. Total payment made by NIPER to NPCC with effect from 1.1.2023 till date.
11. Number of projects under NPCC as a PMC of NIPER.
12. How much amount NPCC received from NIPER with Effect from 1.1.2023 till date & payment made by NPCC.
13. Whether mobilization advance, secured advance requested by agency. If so status of payment made to agency.
14. If payment made, when it was made & amount paid.
15. If payment not made, reasons thereof.
2. The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 29.02.2024 stating as under:
Reply point No. 1 to 15: Information sought is voluminous. However, a lot of relevant information is available on NPCC website: www.npcc.gov.in
3. Being dissatisfied, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 03.04.2024. The FAA vide its order dated 29.04.2024, held as under:
" The CPIO was directed to furnish comments in the matter. She has submitted that reply to the RTI Application has been sent to the Appellant vide letter dated 29.02.2024.After going through the matter, it is refulgent that Application dated 15.12.2023 has been disposed and replied to the Appellant vide letter dated 29.02.2024 whereby the CPIO has informed that relevant information is available on NPCC website which requires no interference.
The Appeal is disposed of accordingly."
4. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
The following were present:-Page 2 of 7
File No: CIC/NPCCL/A/2024/114971 Appellant: Present through video-conferencing. Respondent: Ms. Jasmine Dhar Singh, GM(HR)/CPIO- participated in the hearing.
5. Proof of having served a copy of Second Appeal/Complaint on Respondent while filing the same in CIC on 14.05.2024 is not available on record. The Respondent confirms non-service.
6. The Appellant inter alia submitted that the relevant information has not been provided by the PIO. He stated that he the information sought is not available on the website of Respondent Publica Authority.
7. The Respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that at the initial stage the PIO had replied that the information is available on their official website. However, a fresh reply has been prepared, and point-wise reply has been provided to the Appellant. She placed on record copy of their recent reply.
Decision:
8. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both the parties and perusal of the records, notes that the Appellant has sought information related to work contract awarded by NPCC for NIPER. It is worthwhile to mention that information sought by the Appellant should ideally have been placed in public domain upfront to maintain transparency in the system.
7. Further, the information such as Award letter, Completion Certificate, MB (Measurement Book), Quality Check Report (QCR), Bill of Quantity (BoQ), Registration Certificate of Contractor are also made available to the public on demand as it does not attract exemption as per the RTI Act.
8. The Commission would like to counsel the Respondent that every public authority shall make constant endeavour to take steps in accordance with the requirements of Section 4 (1) (b) of the RTI Act to provide as much information suo moto to the public at required intervals through Page 3 of 7 File No: CIC/NPCCL/A/2024/114971 various means of communications, including internet, so that public does not have to resort to the use of RTI Act to obtain basic information.
10. Commission in its earlier order dated 29.10.2024 in File No. CIC/DSIDC/A/2023/130549 had given similar directions related to information regarding upfront disclosure of information relating to contracts/agreements, the relevant para is reproduced hereinbelow:
"It is noteworthy that the information sought by the appellant at para (a) to (f) of RTI application is in numeric figures which should ideally be available in public domain upfront to maintain transparency in the system. For ease of reading, name of such tender/award letter documents, inter alia are reproduced below
1. NIT.
2. Terms and conditions.
3. Information to bidders (ITB).
4. Minutes of PBC (Pre-bid consultation).
5. Award Letter.
6. Estimated Amount at which tender awarded.
7. Date of start.
8. Date of completion (as per award/NIT).
9. Engineer-in-charge, their name & designation.
10. Supervisor with their name & designation. Usually, the information mentioned above at point Nos. 6 to 10 is included in award letters which should be easily accessible from the website of concerned Public Authority. Further, the information such as completion certificate, MB (Measurement Book), Quality Check Report (QCR), Bill of Quantity (BoQ), Registration Certificate of Contractor are also made available to the public on demand as it does not attract exemption as per the RTI Act. In this regard, the attention of the parties is invited towards a judgement of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case titled Reserve Bank of India vs Jayantilal N. Mistry on 16 December, 2015:AIR 2016 SUPREME COURT 1 wherein it was held as under:-
"...80. At this juncture, we may refer the decision of this Court in Mardia Chemicals Limited vs. Union of India, (2004) 4 SCC 311, Page 4 of 7 File No: CIC/NPCCL/A/2024/114971 wherein this court while considering the validity of SARFAESI Act and recovery of non- performing assets by banks and financial institutions in India, held :-
".............it may be observed that though the transaction may have a character of a private contract yet the question of great importance behind such transactions as a whole having far reaching effect on the economy of the country cannot be ignored, purely restricting it to individual transactions more particularly when financing is through banks and financial institutions utilizing the money of the people in general namely, the depositors in the banks and public money at the disposal of the financial institutions. Therefore, wherever public interest to such a large extent is involved and it may become necessary to achieve an object which serves the public purposes, individual rights may have to give way. Public interest has always been considered to be above the private interest. Interest of an individual may, to some extent, be affected but it cannot have the potential of taking over the public interest having an impact in the socio- economic drive of the country..........."
xxxx
82. We have, therefore, given our anxious consideration to the matter and came to the conclusion that the Central Information Commissioner has passed the impugned orders giving valid reasons and the said orders, therefore, need no interference by this Court."
11. Commission has recently heard a case bearing File No. CIC/DDATY/A/2024/114518 in which Public Authority i.e. Delhi Development Authority has disclosed all tender related information upfront on their website including the measurement books, which were in the electronic form besides all the payment details. It was an additional pleasure to see that the PIO, who is an Executive Engineer rank officer, not only knew that such information is on their website but also demonstrated availability of every information on the computer of the court room during hearing. Commission appreciated such proactive disclosure and expects the present Respondent Public Authority to follow the same.
12. In view of the above, an advisory under Section 25(5) of the RTI Act is issued to the Respondent Public Authority for upfront disclosure of Page 5 of 7 File No: CIC/NPCCL/A/2024/114971 documents/information related to tenders, award letters etc. under Section 4 of the RTI Act to make it easy for a layperson to get relevant information through website without having to resort to RTI mechanism. This will also relieve the Public Authority of the burden of such RTI Applications.
13. Considering the above observations, it is noted that in recent reply placed on record by Ms. Jasmine Dhar Singh the Respondent has not provided information sought at point No. No. 4, 9 (i.e. specifically furnish only the date of payment made), 10 and 12. Accordingly, Respondent is directed to provide a revised reply with respect to point No. 4, 9 (i.e. specifically furnish only the date of payment made), 10 and 12 of the RTI Application within four weeks from the date of receipt of this order. Commission prohibits the PIO from charging fee for such information which is required to be disclosed upfront as per Section 4 of the RTI Act. Further, the PIO is directed to furnish a copy of their recent reply as submitted by Ms. Jasmine Dhar Singh during course of proceedings to the Appellant within one week from the date of this order and upload the compliance report in this regard on the link provided in para 4 of the hearing notice of the Second Appeal.
14. A copy of this order be placed before Competent Authority for earliest implementation of the above advisory.
15. The FAA to ensure compliance of this order.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Vinod Kumar Tiwari (िवनोद कुमार ितवारी) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स!ािपत ित) (S. Anantharaman) Dy. Registrar 011- 26181927 Date Page 6 of 7 File No: CIC/NPCCL/A/2024/114971 Copy To:
The FAA, NPCC Ltd., Plot 148, Sector 44, Gurgaon - 122003 Page 7 of 7 File No: CIC/NPCCL/A/2024/114971 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
1. It is recommended to maintain records in digital form for proper management and ease of access in compliance with clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 4 of the RTI Act, 2005.
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)