Central Information Commission
B S Kang vs Indian Renewable Energy Development ... on 2 June, 2017
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
2nd Floor, August Kranti Bhawan,
Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi-110066
Decision No. CIC/YA/A/2016/000446
Dated 29.05.2017
Appellant : Shri B. S. Kang,
House No. 39, Sector-5,
Chandigarh
Respondent : The Central Public Information Officer (CPIO),
Indian Renewable Energy Department
Agency (IREDA) Limited, 3rd Floor, August
Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New
Delhi-110066
Date of Hearing : 29.05.2017
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:
RTI application : 17.08.2015
CPIO's Reply : 09-09-2015
First Appeal : 25.09.2015
FAA's Order : 21.10.2015
Second Appeal : 13.11.2015
ORDER
1. The appellant filed an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Indian Renewable Energy Department Agency (IREDA) Limited, seeking information on nine points pertaining to a loan sanctioned by the IREDA to M/s Naraingarh Sugar Mills Ltd for setting up a plant at Village Banondi, Ambala, Haryana, including, inter alia, (i) a copy of the application and other relevant documents/records whereby, a loan was applied by the Naraingarh Sugar Mill through its Directors, namely, Jitender Anand, Renu Anand and Rahul Anand, and (ii) a copy of the Statement of Account relating to the loan paid and recovered from the Naraingarh Sugar Mills.
CIC/YA/A/2016/000446 Page 1
2. The appellant filed a second appeal before the Commission on the ground that the CPIO denied the information by taking recourse to the exemption under Sections 8 (1) (d), (e), (h) & (j) of the RTI Act and that the First Appellate Authority (FAA) had upheld the decision of the CPIO. The appellant requested the Commission to direct the CPIO to provide the information sought by him.
Hearing:
3. The appellant, Shri B. S. Kang was not present despite notice. The respondents, Shri A.B. Kiran, Deputy General Manager (DGM- Law), IREDA, Shri Sanjay Bhatt, Advocate, Shri Vikram Singh, Senior Assistant (Legal), were present in person.
4. The respondent submitted that vide CPIO's reply dated 09.09.2015, the appellant was informed that the information sought by him was exempted from disclosure under Sections 8 (1) (d), (e), (h) & (j) of the RTI Act. The respondent further submitted that vide the FAA's Order dated 21.10.2015, the CPIO's reply was upheld. The respondent also stated that the information sought pertains to the records/ documents regarding a loan sanctioned by the IREDA to M/s Naraingarh Sugar Mills Ltd for setting up a plant at Village Banondi, Ambala. The respondent also apprised the Commission that the Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Mumbai has passed a Provisional Attachment Order No. 24/2014 dated 31.12.2014, in regard to the attachment of the land, building, plant and machinery of M/s Naraingarh Sugar Mills Ltd. situated at the Village Banondi, Ambala, Haryana, under Section 5 (1) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA, 2002). The respondent also stated that the information sought is the personal information of a third party, the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest and would cause an unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual concerned. Hence, information cannot be provided to him.
The respondent submitted that the records/ documents with respect to the loan sanctioned by them are held in a fiduciary capacity, the disclosure of which could harm the competitive position of the company. The Respondent further contended that in any case, no larger public interest would be served by the disclosure of such CIC/YA/A/2016/000446 Page 2 information and hence, the information sought was denied by invoking Section 8(1)
(d) of the RTI Act.
Decision:
5. The Commission, after hearing the submissions of the respondent and perusing the records, notes that the information sought by the appellant pertains to the records/ documents regarding the loan sanctioned by the IREDA to M/s Naraingarh Sugar Mills Ltd. The Commission observes that the IREDA, a Non-
Banking Financial Institution performs many functions such as promoting, developing and extending financial assistance for setting up projects relating to new and renewable sources of energy and energy efficiency/conservation and maintaining its position as a leading organization. The loan sanctioned by the IREDA to facilitate the setting up of a plant by M/s Naraingarh Sugar Mills Ltd under the loan agreement is an information which is only privy to the parties to the loan agreement. Clearly, the Commission observes that the information which is part of the loan agreement entered into between IREDA and M/s Naraingarh Sugar Mills Ltd is privy only to these parties and not to the appellant, and fell within the meaning of commercial confidence, the disclosure of which could harm the competitive position of the company. The Commission also notes that the proceedings in respect of the provisional attachment of M/s Naraingarh Sugar Mills Ltd are pending under the PMLA, 2002. In view of this, the Commission observes that the information sought by the appellant is exempted from disclosure under Sections 8 (1) (d) and (h) of the RTI Act. Hence, information cannot be provided to the appellant.
6. With the above observations, the appeal is disposed of.
7. Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
(Sudhir Bhargava) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy (S.S. Rohilla) Designated Officer CIC/YA/A/2016/000446 Page 3