Central Information Commission
D. Nandan Loharuka vs Ministry Of Environment & Forests on 3 August, 2009
Central Information Commission
CIC/AD/C/X/2009/00038
Dated August 03, 2009
Name of the Appellant : D. Nandan Loharuka
Name of the Public Authority : Ministry of Environment & Forests
Background
1. The Applicant filed an RTI application dated 22.8.08 with the CPIO, MoEF seeking information about permission, approval & sanction of 10.190 hectares of forest land on which Tawa-1 coal mines are running under Western Coalfields Ltd. (WCL), Nagpur under Ministry of Coal. The information was sought specifically in the light of the CEC verdict dated 23.08.2006 followed by order dated 14.03.2007. The RTI request was transferred by the CPIO to the Principal Secretary, Govt. of M.P. and to the General Manager, Western Coal Fields Ltd. vide letter dated 1.9.2008 with a request that information be furnished to the Applicant with a copy to the Ministry.
2. The CPIO vide his communication dated 20.10.2008 requested the Chief Conservator of Forests, Western Regional Office, Bhopal to furnish complete information as sought by the Applicant under intimation to the Ministry. Subsequently, the CPIO addressed a letter dated 05.12.2008 to the Applicant enclosing therewith information received from Western Coalfields Ltd. by their letter/s dated 10/11.11.2008 and 25.11.2008. The Applicant herein alleging the information supplied by CPIO to be misleading, irrelevant and contrary to law, filed a First Appeal before the Appellate Authority, MOEF on 14.12.08 reiterating the query under his RTI request seeking information about permission, approval and sanction of 10.190 hectares of forest land on which Tawa-1 coal mines exist.
3. Being denied any information or redressal of his grievance by the Appellate Authority, the Applicant was constrained to prefer a Second Appeal before the CIC on 30.12.08. While reiterating his earlier contentions from the RTI application as also the First Appeal, the Appellant cited that he challenged the misused clarification vide the Ministry of Environment & Forest F. No. 11-121/2002 FC dated 03rd April 2003 as also Non-response to the First Appeal. The Appellant in his Appeal before the CIC made strong allegations of violation of the Forest Conservation Act, 1980 despite the order dated 14th March 2007 passed by the CEC, alleged benefit accruing to WCL, Nagpur under the patronage of Coal India Ltd., Ministry of Coal and MoEF by alleged suppression of report/s and orders of various authorities and also the denial in the payment of compensation of Rs. 6.288 crores. In the Second Appeal, the Appellant prayed for either the supply of correct information as sought by him in his RTI application or discontinuation of the allegedly illegal Tawa-1 Coal mines being run by WCL, in terms of order/s dated 23.08.2006 and 14.03.2007 of CEC, until a compensation of Rs.6.288 crores is paid to him.
4. The Bench of Mrs. Annapurna Dixit, Information Commissioner, scheduled the hearing for March 17, 2009.
5. Mr. B.K. Singh, CPIO, MOEF represented the Public Authority.
6. The Applicant was not present during the hearing.
7. The Commission passed an ex parte order rejecting the Appeal since the information sought by the Appellant was neither specific nor within the jurisdiction of the CIC. In fact in the absence of the Appellant, the exact nature and interpretation of the query as also the gravity of the exercise undertaken by the Appellant could not be estimated for want of either adequate documentary evidence and also lack of any oral submission. However, the Appellant subsequently made repeated requests vide letters dated 19.03.2009, 20.04.2009 and 25.04.2009 insisting that his absence on the date of hearing viz. 17.03.2009 was simply on account of delayed receipt of the notice of hearing on the date of hearing itself. It was furthermore requested by the Appellant that a rehearing in the matter was essential to enable the Appellant to present his case and demonstrate the alleged deception by the Respondents. The Appellant in his letters also alleged that the Respondents continued in their illegal act of coal mining and were involved in a scam running into hundreds of crores of Rupees, in clear violation of Supreme Court orders as also orders passed by the Supreme Court appointed Centrally Empowered Committee. It was further emphasized by the Appellant that the aforementioned acts were required to be prevented on Forest lands in the larger interest of the environment and public at large. A notice was accordingly sent by the CIC on 13th July 2009 seeking the response from the Respondent/s to the allegations of the Appellant.
8. The Bench of Mrs. Annapurna Dixit, Information Commissioner, scheduled a rehearing of the matter for August 03, 2009.
9. Mr. Bishwajit Kumar Singh, CPIO & Sr, Assistant Inspector, MOEF represented the Public Authority.
10. The Applicant was present in person during the hearing. DECISION
11. After some arguments, the Appellant agreed that his query was limited to whether any proposal had ever been put forth and/or sanctioned by either the Central or State Government permitting the running of the Tawa-1 coal mines in the disputed forest land. The representative for the Respondent completely negated the query that there was ever any such proposal and/or sanction from either the Central and/or the State Government. At this stage, the Appellant brought out some document, purportedly a proposal including some site maps and sanctions etc pertaining to the area in dispute to substantiate his contention about the illegal mining in the said area. However, the representative of the Respondent was unaware of existence of such documents and was unable to comment on the existence of any such document. Accordingly he sought opportunity to peruse the said document and any other similar document and make necessary investigation in his department before making any comment in this regard. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, it becomes imperative that the Respondent be given opportunity to examine the documents as referred and relied on by the Appellant at this stage. Hence the Commission directs the Appellant to submit the said documents before the Respondent within 15 days of receipt of this order and the Respondent Public Authority to furnish an affidavit to the Appellant under intimation to the CIC within 15 days thereafter, stating the outcome of the scrutiny of the documents.
(Annapurna Dixit) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy:
(G. Subramanian) Assistant Registrar Cc:
1. Shri D.Nandan Loharuka 62A Sai Mahima Colony Chinch Bhawan Wardha Road Nagpur
2. The CPIO Ministry of Environment & Forests Paryavaran Bhavan CGO Complex Lodhi Road New Delhi 110 003
3. Officer in charge, NIC
4. Press E Group, CIC