Central Information Commission
Mr.G Brahmaiah vs Department Of Telecommunications on 3 June, 2013
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26101592
File No.CIC/BS/A/2012/000187/2636
03 June 2013
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. G. Brahmaiah
81, Type E-II Quarters,
11th Cross, 06th Main,
Malleswaram, Bangalore-560005
Respondent : CPIO & Director (VA)
Department of Telecommunications
Vigilance- I Section
906, Sanchar Bhawan,
20 Ashoka Road, New Delhi- 110001
RTI application filed on : 21/11/2011
PIO replied on : 30/11/2011
First appeal filed on : 19/12/2011
First Appellate Authority order : 31/01/2012
Second Appeal received on : 15/03/2012
Information sought:
I require the complete file details in respect of RC.18 (A)/2008 of ACB, CBI, Bangalore including the correspondence between:
1- ACB, CBI, Bangalore and Vigilance Section of Department of Telecom, 2- Vigilance section of Department of Telecom and Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) 3- Vigilance Section of Department of Telecom and Department of Personnel & Training (DoPT) 4- Any other correspondence with investigating agencies/officers/BSNL/individual persons.
5- File note sheet copies corresponding to RC.18 (A)/2008 of ACB, CBI, Bangalore. The photocopies may kindly be provided for all the above. Grounds for the Second Appeal:
The PIO has denied the information under Section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act. Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing held on 01/04/2013:
The following were present Appellant: Mr. G. Brahmaiah through VC Respondent: Dr. Brajesh Singh CPIO & other The appellant stated that he is being prosecuted in the CBI court and he wants copies of the file notings etc. regarding the sanction accorded for his prosecution by the competent authority. The CPIO stated that the information, if disclosed, would impede the prosecution of the Page 1 of 3 appellant and hence is exempt under Section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act. To a query from the Commission as to how the information sought could impede the prosecution of the appellant, the CPIO requested for an opportunity to make detailed submissions in this regard. The appellant pointed out that he does not need a copy of the CBI report etc., as the same has already been made available to him through the trial court and reiterated that all he needs are the file notings regarding the sanction accorded by the department for his prosecution.
Interim Decision notice dated 01/04/2013:
In view of the foregoing it is decided to grant an adjournment to enable the CPIO to make his written submissions on the issue at hand by 15/04/2013. The CPIO should endorse a copy of his submissions to the appellant so that he can offer his comments, if any, in the matter.
The hearing is adjourned for 25/04/2013 at 04.00 PM.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing on 25/04/2013: The following were present Appellant: Mr. G. Brahmaiah through VC (M: 09448010320) Respondent: Dr. Brajesh Singh CPIO & other (M: 9013134046) The CPIO has given his written submissions dated 17/04/2013 stating that they have consulted the CBI in the matter who have informed that the agency is exempt from the purview of the RTI Act vide Government of India notification F.No.1/3/2011-IR, dated 09/04/2011 and hence the information which, inter-alia, contains inputs from the CBI, is exempt from disclosure. The appellant pleaded that it is very clear from the order dated 05/03/2013 of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi (Sudhir Ranjan Senapathi vs UOI) that the respondents cannot withhold information relating to the sanction accorded by the department for allowing his prosecution which is the only information he seeks.
The CPIO requested that further time may be granted to enable them to make written submissions on the facts and circumstances of the case at hand vis-à-vis the High Court judgment cited by the appellant.
Interim Decision Notice dated 25/04/2013:
In view of the foregoing it is decided to grant an adjournment to enable the CPIO to make his written submissions on the issue at hand by 20/05/2013. The CPIO should endorse a copy of his submissions to the appellant so that he can offer his comments, if any, in the matter.
The hearing is adjourned for 03 June 2013 at 04.00 PM.
.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing on 03/06/2013: The following were present Appellant: Mr. G. Brahmaiah through VC (M: 09448010320) Respondent: Dr. Brajesh Singh CPIO & other (M: 9013134046) The CPIO submitted a copy of his e-mail dated 03/06/2013 sent to the appellant confirming that they are disclosing the information relating to the sanction accorded by the department for prosecuting the appellant. The appellant confirmed receipt of the e-mail.Page 2 of 3
Decision Notice:
As submitted by the CPIO he should furnish the information as above to the appellant within 3 days from the date of receipt of this order.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties. In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.
BASANT SETH Information Commissioner Page 3 of 3