Central Information Commission
Mr.Sharad N Thite vs Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited on 17 May, 2013
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26101592
File No. CIC/BS/A/2012/000677/2521
17 May 2013
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Sharad N. Thite
M-34/2464, MHB Colony,
Yerawada, Pune-411006
Maharashtra
Respondent : CPIO & DGM (Admin)
BSNL
O/o the General Manager Telecom District
Solapur-413002
RTI application filed on : 20/12/2011
PIO replied on : 03/02/2012
First appeal filed on : 25/02/2012
First Appellate Authority order : 12/04/2012
Second Appeal received on : 23/05/2012
Information sought:
The appellant had sought following information for the financial year 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2011-12:
1- Please submit information regarding type of works are outsourced, done through contractors in the O/o GMTD, BSNL, Solapur.
2- Submit the list of contractors with firm name, registration number and details of work done with no. of workers engaged with location-wise in the jurisdiction of O/o GMTD, Solapur. 3- What are terms and condition mentioned in the tender for qualification, work experience etc. to labourers/job workers by the BSNL for various works? 4- Please inform regarding process for allotting the work to contractor and for verification of bills raised by approved tenderer/contractor bills by concerned section. 5- What are the pre-checks before making payments to the contractor/vendor by the bill passing authority, planning office and accounts office in the O/o GMTD, BSNL Solapur? 6- Please submit the information about contractor's bills in the following format for the F.Y. 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 of DE(R) Pandharpur & DE(OCB) Solapur Units. (Format in the RTI application).
7- Please issue a copy of following bills (obverse and reverse side of bill) received by AGM(Plg) for payment of AB Contraction, Solapur with letter no. STD/TP-II/DE/OCB/Job Work./11-12/43 dtd 29/06/2011 by AGM(Plg.), Solapur:-
(a) Bill nos. 179, 194, 208 dtd. 14/03/2011.
(b) Bill nos. 177, 192, 234 dtd. 14/03/2011.
(c) Bill no. 08 dtd. 01/04/2011.
(d) Bill no. 187, 243 dtd. 14/03/2011.Page 1 of 3
(e) Bill no. 17 dtd 01/04/2011.
8- Please issue a copy of letter no. DGM(R)/Mtce & Dev works/2010-11 dt at SO the 09/03/2011 by DGM(R), Solapur.
9- Please issue a copy of letter no. STD/TPII/DE(OCB)/Job work dtd at Solapur the 18/3/2011 by AGM(Plg.), Solapur.
10-Please issue a copy of letter no. STD/DE (OCB)/Staff Corr/10-11/02 dtd. 24/04/2010 by DE(OCB) Solapur.
11- Please issue the copy of the correspondences made to SDEs/JTOs and AGM(Plg) office by the DE(R) Pandharpur and DE(OCB) Solapur in the above said financial year regarding contractors' work/bills etc. if any.
12-Please give the status and action taken report if any on letter no. STD/DE(OCB)/P-2/bill passing/2011-12/19 dated 30/06/2011 to the Sr. G. M, BSNL, Solapur by DE(OCB), Solapur and copy to DE (Vig), Solapur.
13-Please give the name, designation and office name of the officer who has doen the required audit of the BSNL, Solapur SSA for the F.Y. 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11. 14-Copy of file note sheet from which bills of DE(OCB) are/were processed by AGM(Plg) for payments for above said periods.
15-Is there any time limit for redressal of grievances of employee of BSNL? Please issue e- copy (CD format) regarding guidelines issued by corporate office of BSNL against redressal of employee's grievances.
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
The PIO has not given the desired point-wise information.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present Appellant: Absent Respondent: Mr. Anand Kumar CPIO through VC The CPIO stated that it can be seen that the appellant in his RTI application dated 20/12/2011 has asked for huge and voluminous information through 15 queries relating to tenders and work contracts covering the financial years 2008-09 to 2011-12 and all information, as available on record, has been furnished to him vide letters dated 03/02/2012, 25/02/2012 and 17/03/2012. He added that the appellant has also been offered an inspection of records vide letter dated 21/12/2012 so that he can collect whatever further information he needs.
The CPIO pointed out that the appellant is an ex-employee of BSNL who has filed multiple RTI applications seeking huge and voluminous information mostly relating to tenders, work contracts, bills, etc of third parties. He has been supplied huge information contained in 1564 pages and 3 CDs and has also been offered inspection of records on various occasions and compiling of huge and voluminous information for responding to the appellant's various RTI applications is disproportionately diverting the resources of the public authority without serving any public purpose.
The appellant is not present for making his submissions/contesting the facts.Page 2 of 3
Decision notice:
From the submissions of the CPIO it appears that the information has been furnished to the appellant and he has also been offered an inspection of the records for taking whatever further information/documents he needs.
The CPIO has pointed out that the appellant, who is an ex-employee, has filed multiple RTI applications seeking huge and voluminous information mostly relating to tenders, work contracts, bills, etc of third parties and has been supplied 1564 pages of documents and 3 CDs besides being offered inspection of the records on various occasions. He has also contended that reply to the appellant's various RTI applications is disproportionately diverting the resources of the public authority without serving any public purpose. In this context, it will be apt to extract the law propounded by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 6454 of 2011 (Civil Board of Secondary Education & Anr. vs. Aditya Bandopadhyay & Ors.). The relevant portion of para 37 is extracted below:-
"Indiscriminate and impractical demands or directions under RTI Act for disclosure of all and sundry information (unrelated to transparency and accountability in the functioning of public authorities and eradication of corruption) would be counter-productive as it will adversely affect the efficiency of the administration and result in the executive getting bogged down with the nonproductive work of collecting and furnishing information. The Act should not be allowed to be misused or abused, to become a tool to obstruct the national development and integration, or to destroy the peace, tranquility and harmony among its citizens. Nor should it be converted into a tool of oppression or intimidation of honest officials striving to do their duty. The nation does not want a scenario where 75% of the staff of public authorities spends 75% of their time in collecting and furnishing information to applicants instead of discharging their regular duties. The threat of penalties under the RTI Act and the pressure of the authorities under the RTI Act should not lead to employees of a public authorities prioritizing `information furnishing', at the cost of their normal and regular duties."
We hope that the appellant will take a careful note of the above observations for future and refrain from seeking all and sundry information unrelated to transparency and accountability in the functioning of public authorities.
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