Central Information Commission
Mr.Chandra Prakashmalvi vs Hindustan Petroleum Corporation ... on 19 June, 2012
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Room No. 308, B-Wing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi-110066
File No.CIC/LS/A/2011/903897
Appellant Shri Chandra Prakash Malvi.
Public Authority HPCL
Date of hearing 19.06.2012
Date of decision 19.06.2012
Facts :-
Heard today dated 19.06.2012. Appellant not present but has sent a representation by fax which is taken on record. HPCL is represented by Shri Anand Shinde, Manager(Retail) and Shri Rajender Lade, Manager(Legal).
2. It appears that HPCL had placed an advertisement dated 29.8.2010 for allotment of petrol pumps in the entire State of Rajasthan. Vide RTI application dated 9.8.2010, the appellant had sought information on 04 paras. In the first para, he had sought copy of the norms fixed by the State PWD for the location of the petrol pump. In paras 02, 03 & 04, he had sought details of the selection process.
3. The appellant is not a candidate in the matter. As regards the first para, the CPIO had informed the appellant that he could collect this information from the State PWD. As regards the remaining three paras, the CPIO had not provided any information at all. On appeal, the Appellate Authority had passed a detailed order dated 10.7.2011 running into three closely typed pages but had not addressed the issues raised in paras 02, 03 & 04 of the RTI application.
4. In the appeal memo submitted before this Commission, the appellant has relied on certain decisions of this Commission viz : decision dated 23.11.2006 in File No. CIC/MA/C/2006/00116(Pradeep Kumar -vs- BPCL) and decision dated 12.7.2006 in File No.CIC/MA/A/2006/00023 & File No. CIC/MA/C/2006/00039(Javid Yasin Pathan -Vs- HPCL). During the hearing, Shri Shinde submits that the selection process is not yet complete and is continuing and, therefore, the matter can be deemed to be under investigation in terms of section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act. As regards the decisions relied upon by the appellant, he would submit that a careful perusal of these decisions would indicate that they do not help the appellant in any manner whatsoever.
5. I have carefully perused the above mentioned decisions and find that none of the parties have invoked section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act. Hence, ratio of these decisions does not apply in this case.
6. Considering the totality of facts and circumstances, it is ordered that information on para 01 may be supplied to the appellant. No information needs to be supplied regarding paras 02, 03 & 04 of the RTI application. However, after the selection process has been completed, the requested information will be provided to the appellant, if he is still interested in seeking this information.
Sd/-
( M.L. Sharma) Central Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against application and payment of the charges, prescribed under the Act, to the CPIO of this Commission.
( K.L. Das) Deputy Registrar Address of parties :-
1. The Sr.Regional Manager & CPIO, HPCL, Udaipur Regional office, 50 Saheli Nagar, New Polo Ground, Udaipur-313001.
2. Shri Chandra Prakash Malvi, 202, Kajlavan Colony, Tekri, Udaipur, Rajasthan.