Central Information Commission
Mra Selvakumar vs Bhabha Atomic Research Centre on 28 March, 2016
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place,
New Delhi-110066
F. No.CIC/CC/A/2015/902765
Date of Hearing : 07.03.2016
Date of Decision : 28.03.2016
Appellant/Complainant : Shri A. Selvakumar
Kanchipuram
Respondent : Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC)
Kanchipuram
Through:
Dr. S. Velmurugan, PIO
Information Commissioner : Shri Yashovardhan Azad
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 12.11.2014
PIO replied on : 09.12.2014
First Appeal filed on : 29.12.2014
First Appellate Authority (FAA) order on : 27.01.2015
Second Appeal/complaint received on : 24.03.2015
Information sought:
The appellant sought information relating to official vehicles of BARC under 9 points. Background of the case:
Appellant filed an RTI application dated 12.11.2014 seeking the aforesaid information. PIO denied information u/s 8(1)(a) of the RTI Act. The FAA in his order upheld the reply of the PIO.
Relevant facts emerging during hearing:
Both parties are present and heard through video conferencing. The appellant states that the desired information has been denied u/s 8(1)(a) of the RTI Act without any explanation. He states that information sought is not exempt from disclosure as the vehicles about which information has been sought are official vehicles. He further claims that he is seeking this information as the authority has failed to obtain fitness certificate which is compulsory for each vehicle. The respondent states that the vehicles are part of internal transportation of materials in the strategic plants of Nuclear Recycle Board/Bhabha Atomic Research Centre Facilities, Kalpakkam and are used for transporting strategic materials within different plant facilities. On query by the Commission as to whether they have obtained the fitness certificates or not, the respondent states there have been issues in obtaining the same and the matter is being looked into Decision:
After hearing parties and perusal of record, the Commission finds that the information sought by the appellant relates to details with respect to vehicles used in DAE township in Kalpakkam. The respondent have argued that these details cannot be disclosed and have invoked exemption u/s 8(1)(a) of the RTI Act. No detailed arguments have been given in support of exemption u/s 8(1)(a) of the RTI Act except that these vehicles are used for ferrying strategic material between various units of BARC. The appellant has refocused his query stating that mandatory requirement that is fitness certificate for each of these vehicles has been ignored by the respondent authority. While information relating to certain queries like log book of vehicles need not be provided, information relating to fitness certificate which is a mandatory requirement by the RTO for running any vehicle can be disclosed. The Commission, therefore, directs that information on queries 4 & 5 of the RTI application be provided to the appellant, within 3 weeks of receipt of this order, under intimation to the Commission.
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.
(V.D. Naniwadekar) Designated Officer