Central Information Commission
Sh. N. N. Singh, Supdt. Of Police [Cbi] ... vs Bsnl, Office Of Chief General Manager ... on 3 February, 2009
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
CIC/AD/C/2009/000053
February 3rd , 2009
Name of the Appellant: Sh. N. N. Singh, Supdt. Of Police [CBI] (Retd.)
Public Authority: Asstt. General Manager & CPIO
BSNL, Office of Chief General Manager Telecom
Bihar Circle, Patna - 800 001
Background of the case
1. The Appellant herein filed an application invoking provisions of the RTI Act 2005 on 20.06.2008 seeking copy of complete file in respect of offers for land on lease or sale for installation of mobile infrastructure at village Mauhary(Naugarh) Block and District Aurangabad vide Tender No. 25/Press Notice/EE/HJP/07-08/510 dated 25.07.07. The particular documents/information sought were as hereunder:
i. Circulars/instructions/procedures followed for taking final decision; ii. Total number of offers and complete documents received from each applicant against the said tender;
iii. Copy of comparative chart containing details of each applicant; iv. Copy of complete note sheets containing remarks of officials at all levels till final decision about the aforementioned tender; v. Copy of complaint, if any, received in the matter and actions/decisions as well as note sheets of all concerned authorities on such complaint.
2. CPIO's reply The CPIO in his reply dated 07.08.2008 responded on each point of the application. A copy of the circular issued by the authorities in respect of the tender being circular no. BW/USO/Tower/06-07 dated 02.02.2007 issued from S.E. (P&D-II) and copies of the complaints received were sent to the appellant, enclosed with the reply. While disclosing the total number of tenders received, the respondent withheld the information with respect to details/particulars about the applicants alongwith the notesheets, resorting to the exemption provided under Section 8 (1) (e) of the RTI Act 2005.
The appellant communicated to the CPIO vide his letter dated 23.09.2008 acknowledging receipt of the response dated 07.08.2008 alongwith the copy of the circular. It was further stated by the Appellant in his letter that the copies of complaints, though mentioned to have been sent by the CPIO in his letter were not received by him. The Appellant further sought the CPIO to act in compliance of the provisions of the Section 7 and 8(ii) & (iii) and provide the necessary particulars as laid down in the Act.
3. The Appellant filed an appeal before the CIC on 06.11.2008 being aggrieved by the receipt of incomplete information by the CPIO. The Appellant submitted in his appeal that the denial of information by the CPIO was an arbitrary act and clearly violative of the Article 14 of Constitution and alleged that it was a deliberate attempt to hide information for vested interest.
4. The Commission sent a notice fixing the date of hearing on the appeal to the concerned CPIO, BSNL alongwith the Appellant vide the communication dated 22.01.2009. The Respondent Public Authority sent their reply to the appeal vide their communication dated 31.01.2009. The Respondent attached a copy of the letter dated 12.11.08 sent by the CPIO to the Appellant in response to the Appellant's letter dated 23.09.08 furnishing the copies of complaints [two in number] and information as laid down in the Sections 7, 8(ii) & (iii) of the RTI Act 2005.
5. The Bench of Mrs. Annapurna Dixit, Information Commissioner, scheduled the hearing for February 3rd, 2009 and the parties were intimated accordingly.
6. Sh. Surya Prakash, DGM [A] and Sh. Alok Kumar Sinha, EE[C] were present on behalf of the Respondent Public Authority.
7. The Appellant was represented by Mr. Chetan Kumar holding letter of authority dated 30.01.2009 of the Appellant during the hearing. DECISION
8. After perusal of the appeal, written submissions and the other documents and after hearing the arguments of the parties, it is evident that the irregularity in the acceptance of the bid and grant of tender with respect to the lease/sale for installation of mobile infrastructure at village Mauhary(Naugarh) is the cause of the dispute between the appellant herein and the two other complainants. The two complaints submitted before the Commission, forming part of records, indicate that the site selected by the Department does not fulfill the criteria as laid down in the Tender Notice apart from suffering from other lacunae related to accessibility etc. Be that as it may, since the scope of the instant appeal is limited to the furnishing of the information sought by the appellant, the issue to be decided is whether the information sought can be divulged or is the same covered within the ambit of 'Fiduciary Relationship' as laid down in section 8(1) (e) of the RTI Act 2005.
9. In view of the fact that the Tender in question has already been granted there can be no more confidentiality or secrecy about the same. In so far as the 'Fiduciary Relationship' is concerned, the scope of the same begins only when the applicants enter into any transaction with the Respondents. The scope of 'fiduciary relationship' begins only when the Respondent and the party whose information is revealed are in a relation of mutual trust. Since the process of selection is over and the successful bidder being only one person, rest cannot be termed to have entered into any business- relation with the Respondent Public Authority least of all a 'fiduciary relationship'. Hence the information sought, including notesheets, may be provided to the appellant by exercising the Section 10(1) of the RTI Act 2005 and severing the information which is of the likes of trade secrecy within 15 days of receipt of this order.
(Annapurna Dixit) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy:
(K.G.Nair) Designated Officer Cc:
1. Sh. N. N. Singh, Supdt. Of Police [CBI] 122, Arunodaya Apartment, Vikashpuri, New Delhi - 110 018
2. The CPIO & The Asstt. General Manager Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited O/o Chief General Manager Telecom, Bihar Circle Patna- 800 001
3. Officer in charge, NIC
4. Press E Group, CIC