Central Information Commission
Prinkesh Gohil vs Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited ... on 5 February, 2026
केन्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ मागग, मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई निल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
File No: CIC/BPCLD/A/2024/643981
Prinkesh Gohil .....अपीलकर्ाग /Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO : Bharat Petroleum Corporation ....प्रनर्वािीगण /Respondent
Limited, 1st Floor, Golden Triangle, PO
- Navjivan, Post Box No. 6, Ahmedabad
- 380014.
Date of Hearing : 04-02-2026
Date of Decision : 04-02-2026
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Khushwant Singh Sethi
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 18-09-2024
CPIO replied on : 20-09-2024
First appeal filed on : 23-09-2024
First Appellate Authority's order : 25-09-2024
2nd Appeal dated : 02-10-2024
Information sought:
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 18-09-2024 seeking the following information:CIC/BPCLD/A/2024/643981 Page 1 of 7
"Under the provisions of the Right to Information Act, 2005, I hereby request the following information regarding the supply of petrol, diesel, and oil to Shri Sai Petroleum Retail Outlet (RO), located in Udvada, Valsad, Gujarat, bearing Customer Code: 123264.
Retail Outlet Details:
Retail Outlet Name: Shri Sai Petroleum Customer Code: 123264 Location: National Highway 8, Taluka Pardi, Udvada, Valsad, Gujarat Information Requested:
1. Details of the supply of petrol (in liters) to Shri Sai Petroleum RO, Udvada, for the last 3 years from 01/01/2022 upto now 01/09/2024
2. Details of the supply of diesel (in liters) to Shri Sai Petroleum RO, Udvada, for the last 3 years from 01/01/2022 upto now 01/09/2024
3. Details of the supply of lubricants and oils (in liters/kilograms, as applicable) to the said retail outlet during the above period.
Purpose of Request:
The requested information is sought to ensure transparency and accountability in the distribution of essential commodities, which directly affect the public interest.
Justification:
I wish to draw your attention to the following cases which support the disclosure of such information:
1. Shri Dinesh Sankla vs. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. (2006) The Central Information Commission (CIC) ruled that details of the supply of petroleum products by public sector enterprises are disclosable unless an exemption under Section 8 of the RTI Act applies. Public interest in transparency outweighs commercial confidentiality in such cases.
2. K. K. Kishore Kumar vs Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. (BPCL), CIC Decision (2016) - In this case, BPCL was directed to disclose supply details of petroleum products, as they were not deemed commercially sensitive and pertained to public interest.CIC/BPCLD/A/2024/643981 Page 2 of 7
3. Rakesh Kumar Gupta vs. IOCL (2013) The CIC ruled that information on the supply of petroleum products by public sector companies should be disclosed as it relates to the distribution of essential commodities that affect the public. In light of the above precedents, I respectfully submit that there is no valid ground for withholding the requested information under Section 8 of the RTI Act. The supply of petrol, diesel, and oil by BPCL to a private retail outlet does not involve trade secrets or commercial confidence that could harm competitive interests, particularly when weighed against the larger public interest in ensuring transparency in the distribution of essential commodities."
2. The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 20-09-2024 stating as under:
"For point no. 1:
Regarding details of the supply of Petrol (in liters) to our individual RO for the past three years, from 01.01.2022 to 01.09.2024, we regret that since this information is of commercial confidence, the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of the concerned ROs, hence the said information is denied u/s 8(1)(d) of the RTI Act 2005.
For point no. 2:
Regarding details of the supply of Diesel (in liters) to our individual RO for the past three years, from 01.01.2022 to 01.09.2024, we regret that since this information is of commercial confidence, the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of the concerned ROs, hence the said information is denied u/s 8(1)(d) of the RTI Act 2005.
For point no. 3:
Regarding details of the supply of Lubricants oil (in liters) to our individual RO for the past three years, from 01.01.2022 to 01.09.2024, we regret that since this information is of commercial confidence, the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of the concerned ROs, hence the said information is denied u/s 8(1)(d) of the RTI Act 2005."CIC/BPCLD/A/2024/643981 Page 3 of 7
3. Being dissatisfied, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 23-09-2024. The FAA vide its order dated 25-09-2024, upheld the reply given by the CPIO.
4. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Attended the hearing through video conference. Respondent: Mr. Praksah Joshi, DGM (Marketing), attended the hearing through video conference.
5. The Appellant stated that he sought information about the details of petrol, diesel etc. supplied by the respondent to a retail outlet operated on the land owned by his father. The appellant submitted that said outlet had continued their operations despite the expiry of lease agreement in 2017. The appellant contended that the said outlet has gained profits without any renewal of the lease agreement and the respondent ought not to have extended its operation when the said outlet did not possess a valid renewal agreement for operating from the said land.
6. The Commission queried the appellant as to whether he has approached the appropriate forum on the issue of outlet operating despite the non-renewal of the lease agreement. To this, the appellant submitted that he has raised the CIC/BPCLD/A/2024/643981 Page 4 of 7 issue with Petroleum and Explosive Safety Organisation (PESO). The appellant submitted that the respondent ought not to have provided the petrol, diesel to the retail outlet in contention without a renewed lease agreement and hence he has filed a court case for compensation for unauthorized operations of the retail outlet from his father's land and gaining profits therefrom.
7. The Respondent submitted that the appellant has not submitted in his RTI Application that the land lease agreement had expired. He informed that as per the initial land lease agreement submitted by the retail outlet, it had a clause of extending the lease period for 10 years on mutual consent of the parties. Consequently, it was presumed by them that the land lease stood extended.
8. The Commission queried the respondent as to whether they have a renewal agreement for the retail outlet. To this, the respondent did not give a satisfactory response. However, the respondent apprised the Commission that the retail outlet was closed in October, 2024.
Decision:
9. The Commission, after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both the parties and perusal of the records, observes that retail outlet in contention was closed. Hence, the Commission finds that disclosing the quantities already supplied to the closed retail outlet in the preceding years i.e., from 01.01.2022 to 01.09.2024 would not affect the present commercial confidence/competitive position of the third-party retail outlet. In view of the CIC/BPCLD/A/2024/643981 Page 5 of 7 above, the respondent is directed to provide a revised reply to the appellant, incorporating only the quantities of petrol, diesel, lubricants supplied to the retail outlet in contention for the sought period. The respondent shall provide the aforesaid revised reply to the appellant, within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order under intimation to the Commission - both through post and via uploading on http://dsscic.nic.in/online-link-paper-compliance/add. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of.
Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
(Khushwant Singh Sethi) (खुशवन्त स िंह ेठी) Information Commissioner ( ूचना आयुक्त) निनां क/Date: 04.02.2026 Authenticated true copy S. K. Chitkara (एस. के. नचटकारा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26107026 Copy To:
1. The CPIO Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited, 1st Floor, Golden Triangle, PO - Navjivan, Post Box No. 6, Ahmedabad - 380014.
2. The FAA, Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited, 1st Floor, Golden Triangle, PO - Navjivan, Post Box No. 6, Ahmedabad - 380014.CIC/BPCLD/A/2024/643981 Page 6 of 7
3. Prinkesh Gohil CIC/BPCLD/A/2024/643981 Page 7 of 7 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)