Central Information Commission
Samir Sardana vs Directorate Of Enforcement on 24 February, 2021
Author: Neeraj Kumar Gupta
Bench: Neeraj Kumar Gupta
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग,मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
िशकायत सं या/Complaint No. CIC/DIREN/C/2019/643445
Samir Sardana ...िशकायतकता/Complainant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO ... ितवादी /Respondent
O/o. the Directorate of Enforcement
New Delhi
Relevant dates emerging from the complaint:-
RTI : 04-06-2019 FA : 20-06-2019 Complaint: 20-06-2019
CPIO : 12-06-2019 FAO : Not on record Hearing: 18-02-2021
ORDER
1. The complainant filed an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), O/o. the Directorate of Enforcement, New Delhi seeking following information:-
"W.r.t the FIR/ECIR Data of the ED from 2011 to 2019, which is not on the ED website, the following information is sought from the PIO. Type A • FIR/ECIR no. and Year of FIR/ECIR s which name (as accused) any staff or ex-staff or director or ex-director of STCI, STCL, MMTC, PEC and MSTC.
• FIR/ECIR no. and Year of FIR/ECIR s which name (as accused) any staff or ex-staff or director or ex-director of SAIL, RINL, CIL, Indian Railways, NMDC, NLC.
• FIR/ECIR no. and Year of FIR/ECIR s which name (as accused) any staff or ex-staff or director or ex-director of IOC, BPCL, HPCL, ONGC.
Etc. Page 1 of 4 Type B • FIR/ECIR no. and Year of FIR/ECIR s which name (as accused) any Serving or Other Politician in Goa.
• FIR/ECIR no. and Year of FIR/ECIR s which name (as accused) any Relative of a Serving or Other Politician in Goa. • FIR/ECIR no. and Year of FIR/ECIR s which name (as accused) any bureaucrat (from the central or state cadre) with respect to the activities of the said bureaucrat while serving in Goa or for a Goa state undertaking or a GOI undertaking in Goa. Etc."
2. The CPIO responded on 12-06-2019. The complainant filed the first appeal dated 20-06-2019 which was not disposed of by the first appellate authority. Thereafter, he filed a complaint u/Section 18 of the RTI Act before the Commission requesting to take appropriate legal action against the CPIO u/Section 20 of the RTI Act, 2005.
Hearing:
3. The complainant, Mr. Samir Sardana attended the hearing through audio conferencing. Mr. Vipin, Enforcement Officer participated in the hearing along with Mr. Vikalp Mishra, Legal Consultant through audio conferencing. The written submissions are taken on record.
4. At the outset, the complainant requested for conversion of this complaint into 2nd appeal. Further, he submitted that the CPIO has not provided him all the FIR/ECIR data of the ED from 2011 to 2019 including details of any action taken against any politician or any relative of such politicians, any bureaucrat, any private persons of Goa etc. on any matter such as drugs/matka/rape/prostitution/ narco-terror etc. Therefore, an appropriate legal action should be initiated against the then CPIO u/Section 20 of the RTI Act, 2005.
5. The respondent contended that the queries raised by the complainant do not indicate towards any specific allegations of corruption or human rights violations and therefore, the RTI Act, 2005 is not applicable to their organization which has been placed at Serial No. 5 of the 2nd Schedule r/w Section 24 of the RTI Act, 2005.
Decision:
6. This Commission observes that the Directorate of Enforcement has been placed at Serial No. 5 of the 2nd Schedule r/w Section 24 of the RTI Act, 2005 and as such, the RTI Act, 2005 is not applicable to this organization except in the case of corruption and human rights violations. The complainant has also not established any specific instances of corruption or human rights violations in the Page 2 of 4 matter. Instead, he has sought all the FIR/ECIR data of the ED from 2011 to 2019 including details of any action taken against any politician or any relative of such politicians, any bureaucrat and any private persons of Goa on any matter such as drugs/matka/rape/prostitution/narco-terror etc. This sort of non-specific queries are not covered within the definition of 'information' u/Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, 2005.
7. This Commission further observes that while examining the complaint(s) under Section 18 of the RTI Act, the CIC has no jurisdiction to direct disclosure of any information. Accordingly, an application filed u/Section 18 cannot be converted into 2nd appeal. This legal position has been authoritatively settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Chief Information Commissioner and Another v. State of Manipur and Anr. in Civil Appeal Nos. 10787-10788 of 2011 dated 12-12-2011. The relevant extract of the said decision is set down below:-
"30. It has been contended before us by the respondent that under Section 18 of the Act the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission has no power to provide access to the information which has been requested for by any person but which has been denied to him. The only order which can be passed by the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission, as the case may be, under Section 18 is an order of penalty provided under Section 20.
However, before such order is passed the Commissioner must be satisfied that the conduct of the Information Officer was not bona fide.
31. We uphold the said contention and do not find any error in the impugned judgment of the High court whereby it has been held that the Commissioner while entertaining a complaint under Section 18 of the said Act has no jurisdiction to pass an order providing for access to the information."
8. In view of the above, no further intervention of the Commission is required in the matter.
9. With the above observations, the complaint is disposed of.
Page 3 of 410. Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
नीरज कु मार गु ा)
Neeraj Kumar Gupta (नीरज ा
Information Commissioner (सूसूचना आयु )
दनांक / Date : 18-02-2021
Authenticated true copy
(अिभ मािणत स यािपत ित)
S. C. Sharma (एस. सी. शमा),
Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक),
(011-26105682)
Addresses of the parties:
1. CPIO
O/o. the Directorate of Enforcement
6th Floor, Lok Nayak Bhawan
Khan Market, New Delhi-110003
2. Samir Sardana
Page 4 of 4