Central Information Commission
Renganathan Subbiah vs Central Electricity Authority on 8 June, 2023
Author: Saroj Punhani
Bench: Saroj Punhani
के यसचू नाआयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबागंगनाथमाग , मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
File No : CIC/CEATY/C/2022/652391
Renganathan Subbiah ....िशकायतकता /Complainant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO,
CENTRAL ELECTRICITY AUTHORITY,
RTI CELL, SEWA BHAWAN, R K PURAM-I,
NEW DELHI-110066. ... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 07/06/2023
Date of Decision : 07/06/2023
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Saroj Punhani
Relevant facts emerging from complaint:
RTI application filed on : 16/06/2022
CPIO replied on : 21/07/2022
First appeal filed on : 28/03/2022
First Appellate Authority order : Not on record
Complaint dated : 27/09/2022
Information sought:
The Complainant filed an online RTI application dated 16.06.2022 seeking the following information:
"1. Provide the certified copies of exemption order of Kudankulam Nuclear Power Project/Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd, Kudankulam, Tamil 1 Nadu getting exemption from IE (Indian Electricity) Act/ Rule for operating the electrical equipment (Breakers & switch gears in all range voltages).
2. Provide the documents of educational qualification of operators for operating the electrical equipment (Breakers & switch gears in all range voltages) in Kudankulam Nuclear Power Project/Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd, Kudankulam, Tamilnadu.
3. Provide copies of the standard procedure for operating the electrical equipments in all range voltages.
4. As per IE (Indian Electricity) Act/ Rules, Whether employees who are having educational qualification other than that of electrical discipline (such as higher secondary, mechanical, chemical, civil discipline) are eligible for operating breakers & switch gears in Kudankulam Nuclear Power Project/Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd, Kudankulam, Tamil Nadu.
5. Provide the compliance copies of Auditing and Enquiries conducted in Kudankulam Nuclear Power Project (KKNPP), Kudankulam, Tamil Nadu regarding of Electrical Equipment operators in Kudankulam Nuclear Power Project/Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd thereof.
6. Provide the copies of approvals issued by CEA(Central Electricity Authority) authorizing to operate the breakers & switch gears by operators who are qualified with higher secondary education/ ITI or Diploma Mechanical/ Chemical/Civil discipline in Kudankulam Nuclear Power Project/Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd, Kudankulam, Tamil Nādu.
7. Provide the copies of Guidelines issued by CEA for Kudankulam Nuclear Power Project/Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd, Kudankulam, Tamilnadu to operate the breakers & switch gears by operators who are qualified with higher secondary education/ ITl or Diploma mechanical/ chemical/civil discipline.
8. Whether the electrical certificate which is attached herewith issued by Kudankulam Nuclear Power Project (KKNPP) is acceptable or not for operators having qualification other than educational qualification of electrical discipline (such as higher secondary, Mechanical, Chemical, Civil 2 discipline) in Kudankulam Nuclear Power Project/Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd."
The CPIO furnished a reply to the complainant on 21.07.2022 stating as under:
"The information pertaining to GM division of CEA may be treated as NIL."
Being dissatisfied, the complainant filed a First Appeal dated 28.03.2022. FAA's order, if any, is not available on record.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, the complainant approached the Commission with the instant Complaint.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Complainant: Present through video-conference.
Respondent: Rahul Gupta, DD EI & CPIO along with Bhanwar Singh, DIR PSTED and Shishir Prakash, DD GM present through intra-video conference.
The Complainant stated that he is aggrieved with the fact that information has been vaguely denied by the CPIO and also that no order has been passed by the FAA to his First Appeal.
The CPIO at the outset invited attention of the bench towards their written submission dated 29.05.2023, relevant extracts of which are reproduced below in verbatim -
"....2. In this respect, it is to inform that RTI dated 16.06.2022 with Registration no. CEATVALE/22/000 I 8 receipt dated 28-07-2022 was transferred by PSETD division. As GM division does not have any information regarding the queries sought by the applicant. The CPIO, 0M division has replied in the RTI MIS portal which is as under, "The information pertaining to GM division of CIA may be treated as NIL" (copy enclosed for ready reference).
3. Subsequently, the applicant sought information through first Appeal. It may be observed that no specific information was furnished by Appellate 3 authority GM division (copy enclosed for ready reference). Therefore, reply to the first Appeal may be treated as NIL.
4. In view of above, it is to mention that information regarding the queries sought by the RTI applicant pertaining to GM division may be treated as NIL.."
The CPIO further apprised the Commission that since the information sought by the Complainant relates to NPCIL; therefore, the impugned RTI Application was transferred to the said office as well through online RTI portal on 21.06.2022. In this regard, the Complainant vehemently contested the non-receipt of any intimation for transfer and also stated that no reply has been received from NPCIL. In response to it, the CPIO explained that reply/action history to online RTI Application can be accessed from the RTI MIS portal; yet he volunteered to share a copy of all the replies pertaining to instant case with the Complainant.
Decision:
The Commission upon a perusal of records and after hearing submissions of the parties finds no infirmity in the reply and as a sequel to it further clarifications tendered by the CPIO during hearing as the same were found to be in consonance with the provisions of RTI Act.
Moreover, the instant Complaint has no merit as regards to any penal action to be initiated against the CPIO in the absence of any malafide intent on their part. In this regard, the attention of the Complainant is drawn towards a judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the matter of Registrar of Companies & Ors. v. Dharmendra Kumar Garg & Anr. [W.P.(C) 11271/2009] dated 01.06.2012 wherein it was held:
" 61. It can happen that the PIO may genuinely and bonafidely entertain the belief and hold the view that the information sought by the querist cannot be provided for one or the other reasons. Merely because the CIC eventually finds that the view taken by the PIO was not correct, it cannot automatically lead to issuance of a show cause notice under Section 20 of the RTI Act and the imposition of penalty. The legislature has cautiously provided that only in cases of malafides or unreasonable conduct, i.e., where the PIO, without reasonable cause refuses to receive the application, or provide the information, or knowingly gives incorrect, incomplete or misleading 4 information or destroys the information, that the personal penalty on the PIO can be imposed...."
In view of the above and considering more particularly the inability of Complainant to substantiate his grounds of instant Complaint, no scope for further action lies in the matter.
However, in furtherance of hearing proceedings, the CPIO is directed to share a copy of his latest written submission free of cost with the Complainant immediately upon receipt of this order under due intimation to the Commission.
The Complaint is disposed of accordingly.
Saroj Punhani (सरोज पु नहािन) Information Commissioner (सू सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणतस यािपत ित) (C.A. Joseph) Dy. Registrar 011-26179548/ [email protected] सी. ए. जोसेफ,उप-पंजीयक दनांक / Date 5