Central Information Commission
Ashok Kumar Ghamoria vs Petroleum And Explosives Safety ... on 23 August, 2022
Author: Saroj Punhani
Bench: Saroj Punhani
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबागंगनाथमाग , मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
File No : CIC/PAESO/A/2022/109019
Ashok Kumar Ghamoria ......अपीलकता /Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO,
Petroleum and Explosives Safety Organization,
Central Circle Office, Joint Chief Controller of Explosives,
RTI Cell, A-Wing, 2nd Floor Kendralaya,
63/4, Sanjay Place, Agra, Uttar Pradesh-282002 .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 22/08/2022
Date of Decision : 22/08/2022
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Saroj Punhani
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 01/11/2021
CPIO replied on : Not on record
First appeal filed on : 01/12/2021
First Appellate Authority order : Not on record
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 21/02/2022
Information sought:
The Appellant filed an online RTI application dated 01.11.2021 seeking the following information:
"That Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited, Indore has proposed to develop a retail outlet at survey nos. 331/ Min-8, 331/Min-9 and 331/Min-12 situated in village Agar Chhawani, Tehsil and District Agar Malwa in the state 1 of Madhya Pradesh. The copy of Letter of Intent dated 22/01/2020 is attached herewith for your ready reference and perusal. Keeping in view of the aforesaid, kindly provide the following information and documents under the Right to Information, Act 2005:
(1) Certified copy of the No Objection Certificate issued by District Collector, Agar Malwa (M.P) as submitted by Bharat Petroleum Corporation for issuance of Explosives Licence or Initial PESO approval, as the case may be. (2) Certified copy of the site layout bearing the seal of the District Collector, Agar Malwa (M.P.) in token of his approval as submitted by Bharat Petroleum Corporation for issuance of Explosives Licence or Initial PESO approval, as the case may be.
(3)Certified copy of the Explosives Licence or Initial PESO approval, as the case may be, issued by PESO, if any."
Having not received any response from the CPIO, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 01.12.2021. FAA's order, if any, is not available on record.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the non-receipt of information, the appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Present through video-conference.
Respondent: Ashok Kumar Mehta, Controller of Explosives & CPIO present through video-conference.
To a query from the Commission regarding receipt of any reply in response to RTI Application, the Appellant stated that he had received a reply on 31.01.2022 from the CPIO asking him for the details of the explosive license number of BPCL etc. To a query from the Commission , he mentioned that he never responded back to the CPIO as he never had the License number of BPCL . He further narrated his grievance regarding the alleged irregularities practised by PESO in issuance of approval to BPCL for an explosive license for development of a retail outlet in village Agar Chhawani, Tehsil and District Agar Malwa , Madhya Pradesh which apparently is resulting in polluting the residential area which is adjacent area/vicinity to his residence and other residents . Therefore, he has sought the details of the certified copies of the NOC and Site Layout issued by the district 2 authorities and as submitted by Bharat Petroleum Corporation to PESO for issuance of Explosives License.
The Appellant went on to argue that in this regard, he has also filed a complaint on the PG portal of PESO but all went in vain.
The CPIO submitted that since the subject matter pertains to his Bhopal office, therefore, the RTI Application was forwarded to the said office to provide information directly to the Appellant. He further submitted that a reply was sent to the Appellant on 31.01.2022 by the Bhopal office with a request to submit the requisite license number of BPCL for which he has sought the information; however, no response has been received from till date. Therefore, the deemed CPIO was unable to furnish any relevant information to the Appellant. He further tendered his apologies for not uploading the replies on the CIC's website to facilitate the bench.
Decision:
The Commission at the outset considering the submissions of the CPIO hereby directs him to upload a copy of all the replies pertaining to instant matter along with enclosures on the CIC's website for the purpose of record and ensure in future that his written submissions in response to cases before hearing of the Commission reaches or are uploaded on the CIC's website prior to 48 working hours from the date of hearing of the matter.
Further, the Commission upon perusal of records and by taking note of the Appellant's contentions during hearing advises him to give a categorical response to the CPIO's reply dated 31.01.2022 by intimating the fact as mentioned during hearing regarding non-availability of license number of BPCL and upon receipt of it, the CPIO is directed to revisit the contents of RTI Application to provide a revised categorical reply along with readily available information after procuring the same from the actual record holder, without diverting their resources for collation/compilation of information sought. In the event, the information sought for was not found available in their office records then a categorical statement to this effect be reflected in the revised reply of the CPIO.
The above said reply and information should be provided by the CPIO free of cost with the Appellant within 15 days from the date of receipt of specific response 3 from the Appellant and a compliance report to this effect be filed by the CPIO with the Commission thereafter.
Further, by taking empathetic view in the matter, the Appellant is advised to address this issue through appropriate administrative channel i.e. PG Portal once again and CPIO is advised to facilitate due assistance to the Appellant in ventilation of his grievance by placing a copy of this order before the competent authority.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Saroj Punhani (सरोजपुनहािन) हािन) Information Commissioner (सूचनाआयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स#यािपत ित) (C.A. Joseph) Dy. Registrar 011-26179548/ [email protected] सी. ए. जोसेफ, उप-पंजीयक दनांक / 4