Central Information Commission
Vinod V vs Department Of Space on 25 September, 2018
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग , मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं या /Second Appeal No.-CIC/DSPCE/A/2017/159459
Vinod V Baby ...अपीलकता /Appellant
Versus
बनाम
Central Public Information Officer, ... ितवादी/Respondent
Department Of Space, Antariksh Bhawan,
New Bel Road, Bengaluru -560231.
Dated of Hearing:- 24-09-2018
Dated of Decision:- 24-09-2018
RTI Application filed on:- 20-02-2017
CPIO replied on:- 12-06-2017
First Appeal filed on:- 30-06-2017
FAA's order:- 09-08-2017
2nd Appeal received on:- 28-08-2017
ORDER
Facts:
1. The appellant filed RTI application dated 20-02-2017 seeking copy of the Final Order/Award regarding dispute between M/s Devas and M/s Antrix w.r.t.
following:-
"l. The International Court of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce in Case No. 18051/CYK (Devas Multimedia Private Limited (Devas) [Claimant] Vs Antrix Corporation Limited (Antrix) [Respondent].
2. The Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) Tribunal at The Hague in PCA Case No. 2013-09. CC/Devas (Mauritius) Ltd., Devas Employees Mauritius Private Limited and Telecom, Devas Mauritius Limited [Claimant] Vs Republic of India [Respondent]."
2. The appellant filed second appeal on 28-08-2017 before the Commission on the ground that information should be provided to him. Hearing:
3. Both the parties participated in the hearing through video conferencing. Mr. M. Ramadas (Dy. Secy.) represented the respondent. The written submissions are taken on record.
4. The appellant stated that the respondent should provide him copy of the arbitral award w.r.t. dispute between M/s Devas and M/s Antrix. Further, he stated that disclosure of the sought for information is in larger public interest.
5. The respondent stated that the process of arbitration is not yet over. He intimated that it is an interim award and not the final award. Further, he stated that disclosure of the sought for information would jeopardize the economic interest of the country as the quantum of damages is not yet decided by the arbitral tribunal, therefore, exemption available u/Section 8(1)(a) of the RTI Act is attracted. He stated that the proceedings of the arbitral tribunal are confidential in nature and hence, the exemption available u/Section 8(1)(b) of the RTI Act is applicable in this case. In addition, he stated that the arbitral award is under judicial scrutiny and no larger public interest is involved in disclosing this information. He also stated that the investigation(s) is pending before the Enforcement Directorate w.r.t. Antrix-Devas contract. These investigations cover broad spectrum of issue commencing from the contract negotiation to the arbitral award. Hence, the exemption available u/Section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act is also attracted in this case. Discussion/ observation:
6. In view of the above, this Commission observed that the sought for information cannot be disclosed to the appellant, as the subject matter is pending investigation. The arbitration proceedings are also not yet over. Disclosure of this information has its bearing on the economic interest of the country. Further, no larger public interest is involved in disclosing this information. Hence, the exemptions available u/Sections 8(1)(a), 8(1)(b) and 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act are applicable in this case. Decision:
7. No further intervention of the Commission is required in the matter.
The appeal is disposed of. Copy of the order be given to the parties free of cost.
Radha Krishna Mathur (राधा कृ ण माथुर) Chief Information Commissioner (मु य सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स ािपत ित) S.C. Sharma Dy. Registrar एस. सी. शमा , उप-पंजीयक एस. सी.
(011-26186535)