Central Information Commission
Bipin Chandra vs Ministry Of Environment & Forests on 18 July, 2017
Central Information Commission
Room No.307, II Floor, B Wing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi-110066
website-cic.gov.in
Appeal No. CIC/SM/A/2013/000694/MP
Appellant : Shri Bipin Chandra, Delhi
Public Authority : M/o Environment, Forests & Climate Change, New
Delhi
Date of Hearing : July 12, 2017
Date of Decision : July 17, 2017
Present:
Appellant : Not present
Respondent : Shri Shard, Scientist 'D' and Shri Subroto Bose,
Scientist 'E' - at CIC
RTI application : 13.12.2012
CPIO's reply : 02.01.2013
First appeal : 21.01.2013
FAA's Order : 06.03.2013
Second appeal : 15.04.2013
ORDER
1. Shri Bipin Chandra, the appellant, sought all the documents submitted for approval of NCDMA for various hydropower projects of 24MW Shambori Hydropower Project, 24MW Perla Hydropower Project, 24MW Kukke stage-I Hydropower Project in Dakshin Kannada, Karnataka; 24MW Mahan stage- III Hydropower Project in Sarguja, Chhattisgarh; 780 Nyamjang Chhu Hydropower Project, Tawang, Arunachal Pradesh; date of meetings in which the above stated projects were considered along with the copy of approval letter for each project and the minutes of the meetings.
2. The Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) informed the appellant that the project proponents had commercial proposition in developing the said CDM projects and the documents asked by the appellant contained personal information in respect of the project proponents, disclosure of which was exempt under the RTI Act, 2005. The CPIO, however, provided the details of submission, meeting and approval dates of the said hydropower projects along with the project wise extract of the minutes of the meeting in a point-wise response to the appellant's RTI application. The appellant, being dissatisfied with the CPIO's response, filed an appeal before the First Appellate Authority (FAA) stating that the CPIO failed to mention the relevant section/provision of the RTI Act under which he was denied information and incomplete information was provided to him and requested the FAA to direct the CPIO to provide complete and correct information, in public interest. The FAA upheld the decision of the CPIO and denied disclosure of project documents u/s 8(1)(d) & 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, 2005. The FAA also gave an opportunity to the appellant to visit the office and to take a look at the files containing the minutes of the said projects. Aggrieved with the denial of requested information by FAA, the appellant approached the Commission and requested the Commission to direct the CPIO to provide complete and correct information. In addition to above, the appellant also sought imposition of penalty upon the CPIO & the FAA and direction to MoEF u/s 4 of the Act to upload all the project related details on NCDMA website.
3. The matter was heard by the Commission. The appellant was not present despite the notice for hearing having been duly sent to him. The appellant had approached the Commission alleging that incomplete information relating to project documents for five Hydropower Projects had been provided to him by the CPIO.
4. The respondents stated that the National Clean Development Mechanism Authority (NCDMA) had been set up in the M/o EF&CC to facilitate implementation of Kyoto Protocol under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) as a step towards reduction in green house gases emission. The role of NCDMA was to grant Host Country Approval (HCA) in accordance with the procedure agreed by the parties to Kyoto Protocol under UNFCCC. To grant HCA, the applicant had to submit Project Concept Note (PCN) and Project Design Document (PDD) and other documents to get statutory clearance from NCDMA which were examined by the Inter Ministerial Committee in order to check the antecedents of the applicant. The PCN contained personal information of the applicant while PDD had commercial information of the project which were submitted with the respondent authority by the applicant in fiduciary capacity and therefore, disclosure of the same was denied to the appellant u/s 8(1)(d) & 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, 2005. The CPIO had, however, provided the details of submission, meeting and approval dates of the said hydropower projects along with the project wise extract of the minutes of the meeting in a point-wise response to the appellant's RTI application. Further, the appellant was also given an opportunity to visit the office and inspect the files and obtain the disclosable information regarding the project details which was not availed by him. The appellant was not present to put forth his contentions.
5. On hearing the respondent and perusing the available records, the Commission observes that the CPIO has provided the disclosable information to the appellant as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 while, the personal and commercial project details submitted by the project applicants with the respondent authority could not be disclosed to the appellant in view of Section 8(1)(d) & 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, 2005. The Commission holds that the CPIO has appropriately responded in the matter. The appeal is disposed of.
(Manjula Prasher) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy:
Dy Registrar Copy to:
The Central Public Information Officer The First Appellate Authority Ministry of Environment, Forests & Ministry of Environment, Forests & Climate Change, Climate Change, Scientist E, Joint Secretary, RTI Cell, Indira Paryavaran Bhawan, Indira Paryavaran Bhawan, Aliganj, Jor Bagh Road, Aliganj, Jor Bagh Road, New Delhi - 110 003 New Delhi - 110 003 Shri Bipin Chandra, 86 - D, AD Block, Shalimar Bagh, Delhi - 110 088