Central Information Commission
Bandaru Prabhavathi vs Tobacco Board on 28 June, 2022
Author: Saroj Punhani
Bench: Saroj Punhani
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबागंगनाथमाग , मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
File No : CIC/TOBBO/A/2021/623435 &
CIC/TOBBO/C/2021/623432
BANDARU PRABHAVATHI ......अपीलकता /Appellant
....िशकायतकता /Complainant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO,
Tobacco Board, Head Office,
RTI Cell, Nr. Medical Club,
Grand Trunk Road,
Nagarampalem, Guntur, Andhra
Pradesh-522004. .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 23/06/2022
Date of Decision : 23/06/2022
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Saroj Punhani
Note: The above referred Appeal/Complaint have been clubbed for decision as
these are based on the same RTI Application.
Relevant facts emerging from appeal/complaint:
RTI application filed on : 18/03/2021 & 18/03/2021
CPIO replied on : 15/04/2021 & 15/04/2021
First appeal filed on : 04/05/2021 & 04/05/2021
First Appellate Authority order : 19/05/2021 & 19/05/2021
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 10/06/2021 & 10/06/2021
CIC/TOBBO/A/2021/623435 &
CIC/TOBBO/C/2021/623432
1
Information sought:
The Appellant/Complainant filed an RTI application dated 18.03.2021 seeking the following information:
"I, Bandaru Prabhavathi have sent two representations to the Auction Superintendent, Tangutur-2 requesting him to not to renew the licenses to the Barns bearing nos. 24017105-TBGR105 and 24017106-TBGR106 located at M. Nidamalur Village of Tangutur Mandal, Prakasham District as I am the absolute owner of the land bearing Sy. No. 238 in which the above mentioned barns are located. In this regard, as my request was not honored, I have moved the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh vide W. P. No. 18915 of 2020. However, the authorities have filed false counter affidavit with concocted stories as if the barneys are in use. In this regard, I would like to know certain information under RTI Act, 2005.
1). Kindly let me know the status of my representations submitted at the Tobacco Board, Guntur and Auction Superintendent, Tangutur-2 and field inspection/enquiry report in respect of fitness of Barns bearing nos. 24017105-TBGR105 and 24017106-TBGR106 located at M. Nidamalur Village of Tangutur Mandal, Prakasham District.
a). Procedure followed in renewing the licenses to the Barns bearing nos.
24017105-TBGR105 and 24017106-TBGR106 located at M. Nidamalur Village of Tangutur Mandal, Prakasham District for the last four years.
b). As the above mentioned barns were not in use, kindly let me know the basis upon which license was renewed in respect of Barns bearing nos. 24017105-TBGR105 and 24017106-TBGR106 located at M. Nidamalur Village of Tangutur Mandal, Prakasham District.
3). Certified copy of rules and regulations in vogue in respect of issuance, renewal and termination of licence to the barn operators The CPIO replied to the appellant/complainant on 15.04.2021 stating as follows:-
1 (a):- As per production policy guidelines laid down by Board the barns license bearing no. 24017105-TBGR105 and 24017106-TBGR106 located at M. Nidamalur Village of Tangutur Mandal, Prakasham District were renewed for the last four years.
1(b):- As per production policy guidelines laid down by Board the barns license bearing no. 24017105-TBGR105 and 24017106-TBGR106 located at:M. Nidamalur Village of Tangutur Mandal, Prakasham District were renewed.
22. copy of production policy guidelines enclosed (2020-21 Andhra Pradesh crop season).
Being dissatisfied, the appellant/complainant filed a First Appeal dated 04.05.2021. FAA's order dated 19.05.2021 upheld the reply of CPIO.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, the appellant/complainant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal/Complaint.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant/Complainant: Along with Mahesh Mamindla present through video- conference.
Respondent: B Shyam Prasad, Manager (Mrktg. & Exports) and Production/ CPIO present through video-conference.
The Rep. of the Appellant/Complainant while reiterating the contents of RTI Application expressed his dissatisfaction with the CPIO's reply on the ground of wrong and misleading information furnished by the CPIO. He further harped on the action/inaction of the Respondent in renewal of barns license without following the prescribed norms/regulations on the grounds mentioned below-
".....It is also to submit that the communication sent to Department of Commerce, Ministry of Commerce & Industry vide F.No.6(1)/2019-20/PDN, Dt. 26.10.2020 mentioned that the barns were newly reconstructed six years back that too when the proof of land ownership was insisted for. The alleged barn license holder having eye on my property has reconstructed the new barns without my consent and thereafter the barns were never put to use as I have opposed his modus operandi. It is to submit that the barn licenses were obtained by playing fraud especially with the conniving Auction Superintendent who has never come from field inquiry and did not visit the barn site but simply declared that those barns are in fit condition.
Even, granting barn license to them those who do not have legally valid agreement of lease is against the provisions of the law of the land especially as per Article 300A of the Constitution of India and it is also an atrocity against an aged widowed woman.
I wonder when the barns were reconstructed why did not the Auction Superintendent, APF-34 insisted for valid agreement of lease or land ownership document. It manifests how the field level officials are in cahoots with the barn license holders who are hoodwinking people and trying to grab the land.3
As per your 2013-14 policy guidelines, there must be proof of land ownership and for which Sri Bezawada Krishna Murthy doesn't have. Hence, he should not have been issued barn license.
A.S., Tangutur-II has deliberately given wrong information because the barns were not in use ever since those were reconstructed in the year 2014 as I did not give consent to cure the tobacco in those barns. Hence, there is no scope for the barns being in fit condition and A.S., Tangutur-II has not even conducted a filed inquiry as he couldn't visit the barns as bushes are around the barns.
As submitted above, the barn license was given in an arbitrary and illegal manner..."
Per contra, the CPIO invited attention of the bench towards their written submission dated 17.06.2022, relevant portion of which is reproduced in verbatim below -
" ...Initially, Smt, B. Prabhavathi submitted representations to the Auction Superintendent, Tangutur-ll on 16.05.2020 and 26.092020 (Copy placed at Annexure- I) seeking cancellation of registration existing on the names of Sri Bezawada Krishna Murthy and his wife Smt Bezawada Lakshmi whose barns bearing TB No's 24017105 (1.00 share) and 24017106 (1,00 share) are located in her own land at M. Nidamatur village of Tangutur Mandel, Prakesam District. The reply was given to the applicant by the Auction Superintendent, Tangutur-II on 14.10.2020 (Copy placed at Annexure- II).
She has also submitted a representation to the Auction Superintendent [Production), Head Office Guntur on 26.09.2020 (Copy placed at Annexure-Ill) claiming the same. The Auction Superintendent (Production) in term requested Auction Superintendent. Tangutur to submit report on the contents submitted in the representation. As per field report submitted by Auction Superintendent, Tanguur, the following two licensed barns of the growers are in the site of Smt. Bandaru Prabhavathi of Iv1,Nidamaluru village of Tangutur Mandel, Prakasam district are in fit condition.
The said two licensed barns are in the same site for more than 40 years and the two barns are reconstructed by above said registered growers during 2014 back in the same place as the barns became too old and at the time of reconstruction of barn the Board has not received any complaints by the complainants. After reconstruction of these barns, site owner Smt B. Prabhavathi and her family members asked the above said registered growers not to cure the barns and remove the barns from their site as they want to sell the site to others. Above said registered growers in presence of elders in the M.Nidamaluru village requested the site owner to sell the barn site to them as per market rate in M, Nidamaluru Mace. As per the information given by villagers, there is difference of opinion on the rate of ms see between site 4 owner and above said growers for last 3 years. Based on said field report by Auction Superintendent, Tangutur a reply was given to the applicant on 08.10.2020 by Auction Superintendent (Production), Head Office Guntur (Copy placed at Annexure- 1V) reforming that registration to barn license will be considered as per production policy gudelines laid down for 2020-21 crop season by the Board.
Smt. B. Prabhavathi also sought information under RTI Act, 2005 through online vide application no. TOBBO/R/E/20100019 dated 03.10.2020 (Copy placed at Annexure-V) with'regard to condition of the barn and lease agreement submitted by the growers, The reply was given to the applicant vide letter No. 1(95)A/2019- 20/Pdn, dated 19.10.2020 (Copy placed at Annexure-VI) by Auction Superintendent (Production) & CP10 stating that the barns are in fit condition as per field report and lease agreement is not available, By not satisfying with reply: the applicant filed first appeal to the then Executive Director and First Appellate Authority through online vide Appeal No. TOBBO/A/E/00005 dated: 27.10.2020 (Copy placed at Annexure-VII) stating that the information provided by CP10, Auction Superintendent (Production) with regard to condition of the barn is not true and the Auction Superintendent. Tangutur has provided false information without verification. She has also alleged that the Auction Superintendent, Tangutur has not obtained lease agreement with regard to and from growers as per shifting guidelines at the time of reconstruction and granted registration to the growers, which is illegal. The appeal is disposed by the then Executive Director and Appellate Authority, Tobacco Board. Guntur and reply was given to the Applicant vide letter no. 1(95A/2020-21/PDN dated 17.11.2020 (Copy placed at Annexure-VIII), Smt. B. Prabhavathi also made complaint dated 27.10.2020 (Copy placed at Annexure-IX) against Sri S. Rama Rao Auction Superintendent, Tangutur-11 to Executive Director & Secretary, Tobacco Board. In this regard as per Head Office instructions, the Regional Manager (SBS), Ongole had physically inspected the barns of Sri B_ Krishna Murthy & Snit. Blakshrni of M. Nidamaluru village on 06.11.2020 and submitted a report vide letter no.R.M0/5(5)/2020-21/PDN. dated 06.11.2020 along with barn photographs stating that the barns are in fit condition and were reconstructed in the year 2014 in the same place in survey no.238, As per production policy of Board since barns are in fit condition, concerned Auction Superintendent has renewed registration to the barns existing in survey no 238. The reply was given to Smt B. Prabhavathi vide letter no_1(1)/12020- 21/PDN/1533. dated 10.11.2020 (Copy placed at Annexure-X).
Meanwhile, Smt. B. Prabhavathi has also filed WP No.18915 of 2020 in the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi and legal notice dated 17:10.2020 was served to Tobacco Board by Sri K. Raja Sekhar, Advocate (Copy placed at Annexure-Xl). Board filed counter affidavit in this case (WP No.18015 of 2020) through standing counsel of Tobacco Board (Copy placed at Annexure-XII). The case is still pending in the Hon'ble High Court.
5Smt. B. Prabhavathi again filed online application under RTI Act, 2005 through online vide application no. TOBBO/R/E/21/00003 dated 18.03.2021 and the copy of the same is placed at Annexure-Xlll. The reply was given to the applicant by Auction Superintendent (Production) & CPIO vide letter No. 1(95)A/2020-21/Pdn, dated 15.04.2021 (Copy placed at Annexure-XIV).
Smt B. Prabhavathi also submitted representation dated: 18.03.2021 to the then Secretary Tobacco Board and grievances to the Ministry (Copy placed at Annexure-XV) on subject matter and reply was given by Auction Superintendent (Production) vide letter 25.03.2021.(Copy placed at Annexure-XVI). Later, Smt B. Prabhavathi filed an appeal dated 04.05.2021 to Executive Director & appellate Authority in respect of reply given vide letter dated 15.04,2021 by the Auction Superintendent (Production) & CP10 under RTI Act, 2005 to her RTI application dated 18.03.2021 and the copy of the appeal is placed at Annexure-XVII. The appeal was disposed off and the communication was sent to Smt B. Prabhavathi vide letter dated 19.05.2021 (Copy placed at Annexure-XVIII).
Smt. B. Prabhavathi in continuation to RTI application dated 18.03.2021 filed another RTI application no. TOBBO/R/E/21/00013 dated 13.09.2021 through online (Copy placed at requesting to furnish the same information as requested vide RTI application dated 18.03,2021. The reply was given to Snit. B. Prabhavathi to her RTI application vide letter no. 1(95)A/2019-20/PDN, dated 07.10.2021 (Copy placed at Annexure-XX). As the applicant is repeatedly requesting the condition of barns in her RTI application filed to the Board. Dr. M. Krishna Sri, Manager (Production) & CPIO physically inspected the barns claimed by Snit B. Prabhavathi on 21.09.2021 along with Sri B. Majunath, Regional Manager (SBS). Sri A. Srinivasa Rao, Auction Superintendent, Tangutur, Sri S. Rama Rao then Auction Superintendent, Tangutur and Smt. P. Sakunthala, Auction Superintendent Production) and made an enquiry with the arower Sri B. Krishna Murthy regarding lease agreement for the land of Smt. B. Prabhavathi where the two licensed barns are existing and the curing details of tobacco of the growers during last year. During an enquiry, it was found that Sri B. Krishna Murthy is not having any lease agreement for the land of Smt B. Prabhavathi and during the year of reconstruction also they have not entered any lease agreement for land with Smt B. Prabhavathi.
Further, it was observed that there are some disputes between them and which were not settled so far which clearly proved from the trench observed during inspection around the West and South sides of the barns. The copy of the inspection report dated 23.09.2021 given by Regional Manager (SBS) & CP10 is placed at Annexure- XXA. The Manager (Production) suggested the grower to settle the disputes and Board should not be made party in these type of disputes in the court. During inspection, the barn owners complained that it is becoming difficult for them to cure tobacco as the and owner Smt. B. Prabhavathi is not allowing them to cure tobacco in their barns. The grower has cured tobacco in his second own barn and the barn of the other grower Sri Kakumanu Murali of same village.
6Further, it is to inform that Smt. B. Prabhavathi represented to the Board several times through Sri Mahesh Mamindla. Advocate and the details are as follows;
Sri Mahesh Mamindla submitted an e-mail dated 08.10.2020 to the Chairman & Executive Director, Tobacco Board (Copy placed at Annexure-XX1). The reply was given to him vide letter no,1(95)N2019-20/PDN, dated 12.10.2020 (Copy placed at Annexure-XXII), Sri Mahesh Mamindla, Advocate, on behalf of Smt. B. Prabhavathi has filed grievance dated 02,10.2020 to Department of Commerce stating that barn operators are getting license without submitting legally valid agreement of lease documents (in respect of barns Located in other person's lands) and Auction Superintendents are renewing the licenses in a mechanical manner and the Ministry forwarded the same to the Board vide letter no.51212020-Ep(Agri.VI), dated 09.10.2020 (Copy placed at Annexure-XXIII) to take an appropriate action on the grievance of Shri Mahesh Mamindla. The reply was given to Ministry under copy to Sri Mahesh Mamindla vide letter no.6(1)12019-20/PDN, dated 13.10,2020(Copy placed at Annexure-XXIIV). In the reply it was informed that mere disputing the ownership rights of licensed barn by way of representation cant be considered as a dispute and renewal of registration will be granted to the existing grower to whom the registration was granted in previous season as per production policy guidelines laid down by Board.
Again, Sri Mahesh Mamindla submitted a mail on 14.10.2020 (Copy placed at Annexure-XXV) requesting to bring the appropriate changes to the barn licensing and renewal policy. The reply was given vide letter no -2319-20/PDN. dated 26 10.2020(Copy placed at Annexure-XXVI) Sri Mahesh Mamindla sought information under RTE Act. 2005 through online vide application no. TOBBORIE120/00022 dated 03.11.2020 and the copy of the letter is placed at Annexure-XXVIL The information was given to the applicant by Auction Superintendent (Production) & CPIO vide letter No. 1(95)A/2020-21/Pdn, dated 23.112020 (Copy placed at Annexure-XXVIII).
The grievance was again filed by Sri Mahesh Mamindla, Advocate on behalf of Sr-It B Prabhavathi to Department of Commerce on 18.032021 and the same was forwarded to the Board by Ministry vide e-mail letter no_ 5/2/2020-EP(Agri.VI), dated 24.03.2021 spy encf_Osed at Annexure-XX1X). The reply was given vide letter Ro.1(8)C/2020-21.PON dated- 25.03.2021 to Sri Mahesh Mamindla under copy to Ministry(Cooy enclosed at Annexure-XXX). He also made request to take action against Auction Superintendent, Tangutur vide e-mail dated 26.03.2021 (Copy enclosed at Annexure-XXXI and reply was given vide letter no 1(8)C/2020-211PDN dated 20.04.2021 (Copy enclosed at Annexure-XXXII) informing that as per physical verification of Regional Manager. Ongole (SBS) the ham are in fit condition & Auction Superintendent renewed registration to these barns as per policy."
Decision:
7The Commission upon a perusal of records and after hearing submissions of both the parties is of the considered view that the reply and subsequent clarifications tendered by the CPIO during the hearing adequately suffices the information sought by the Appellant/Complainant as per the provisions of RTI Act.
Moreover, the issue raised by the Rep. of Appellant/Complainant challenging the veracity of renewal of barns license is a matter of grievance which is not amenable under the RTI Act. In this regard, the Appellant/Complainant is advised to pursue the matter through proper channel.
In view of the above, no further intervention of the Commission is warranted in the matter and submissions of the CPIO are upheld.
However, in the interest of justice, the CPIO is directed to share a copy of their written submission dated 17.06.2022 along with enclosures free of cost with the Appellant/Complainant. The said direction should be complied by the CPIO within 2 days from the date of receipt of this order under due intimation to the Commission.
The appeal/complaint is disposed of accordingly.
Saroj Punhani (सरोजपुनहािन) हािन) Information Commissioner (सूचनाआयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स$यािपत ित) (C.A. Joseph) Dy. Registrar 011-26179548/ [email protected] सी. ए. जोसेफ, उप-पंजीयक दनांक / 8