Central Information Commission
Harendra Kumar vs Ministry Of Defence on 6 February, 2017
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus,New Delhi-110067
Tel: +91-11-26106140/26179548
Email - [email protected]
File No. CIC/VS/A/2015/003303/SD
Date of Decision:08/12/2016
Relevant facts emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Harendra Kumar, JE (Civil)
HAD Coy, Near Air Force Station
Candigarh - 160003
Respondent : CPIO
Headquarters
Chief Engineer
Project Himank
PIN - 931710
C/o 56 APO
RTI application filed on : 19/06/2015
PIO replied on : 25/06/2015
First appeal filed on : 09/07/2015
First Appellate Authority : 05/08/2015
order
Second Appeal dated : 24/08/2015
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : SHRI DIVYA PRAKASH SINHA
Information sought:
The Appellant sought to know whether the JCO/Supervisors Mess at HAD Coy is functioning or not, if it is functioning he wants the copies of cash books and a list of properties indicating amount & year of purchase since last 5 years.
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
The CPIO has not provided the desired information.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:-1
Appellant: Present in person.
Respondent: P.C. Abulkod, Administrative Officer & CPIO, Chief Engineer, Project Himank, C/o 56 APO present in person.
Appellant stated that he sought information to expose corrupt practices in the functioning of JCO's Mess. He further stated that facilities extended by Mess Authorities to its users are inadequate denoting corruption in functioning of the Mess.
CPIO submitted that BRO is an exempted organisation under Section 24 of the RTI Act.
Decision Border Road Development Board (BRDB) has been placed in Second Schedule of the RTI Act vide notification No. GSR 347 dated 28/09/2005 by Central Government in exercise of the power conferred by sub-section 2 of Section 24 of the RTI Act.
The status of General Reserve Engineer Force (GREF) and Border Roads Organisation (BRO) in relation to BRDB has been clarified by Ministry of Shipping, Road Transport and Highways (BRDB) vide their I.D Note No.F.06/280/BRDB/ADMN-2005 dated 02.03.2006 and Memo No. BRDB/03/199/GE-1, dated 08.09.2009 that "the Border Roads Organisation (BRO) is an executive arm of Border Road Development Board and is part of it.Therefore, RTI Act does not apply to BRO except in cases of corruption and human rights violation, as specified in the Act" and that "BRO draws its work force from two streams i.e Army and Civil. The personnel from Civil stream are called as General Reserve Engineer Force,(popularly known as GREF). The officers and subordinates from the Army are posted to BRO on Extra Regimental Employment (ERE) tenure for a period of two and half to three years."
In view of this, nothing contained in this Act shall apply to the BRO and GREF. Section 24(1) of the Act is reproduced below:
(1) Nothing contained in this Act shall apply to the intelligence and security organisations specified in the Second Schedule, being 2 organisations established by the Central Government or any information furnished by such organisations to that Government:
Provided that the information pertaining to the allegations of corruption and human rights violations shall not be excluded under this subsection:
Provided further that in the case of information sought for is in respect of allegations of violation of human rights, the information shall only be provided after the approval of the Central Information Commission, and notwithstanding anything contained in Section 7, such information shall be provided within fortyfive days from the date of the receipt of request.
This has been re-asserted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide it's decision in Civil Appeal No. 6454 arising out of SLP No. 7526/2009 in CBSE Vs. Aditya Bandopadhyay case stating:
''Exclusion of the Act in entirety under Section 24 to intelligence and security organizations specified in the Second Schedule even though they may be "public authorities", (except in regard to information with reference to allegations of corruption and human rights violations)''.
The Right to Information Act 2005 was enacted to bring transparency and accountability in functioning of the Government, both of which help to reduce corruption and increase efficiency in governance. It also encourages people to participate in the functioning of democratic institutions.
The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gurudevdatta VKSSS Maryadit and Ors v State of Maharashtra and Ors. (2001) 4SCC 534 held as under:
''The golden rule is that the words of the statute must prima facie be given their ordinary meaning. It is yet another rule of construction that when the words of the statute are clear, plain and unambiguous, then the courts are bound to give effect to that meaning."3
Appellant has stated during the hearing that he suspects presence of corrupt practices in functioning of JCO's/Supervisor's Mess, hence exemption under Section 24 of RTI Act is not applicable in respect of his RTI Application. The expression ''allegation of corruption'' and ''violation of human rights'' is not defined in the Act. It is thus open for the Commission to decide the veracity of allegations on both counts on a case to case basis. Allegation of corruption and Human Rights violation in this section should be construed to mean verifiable allegations meaning that some charge of corruption or Human Rights violation is not sufficient in the absence of any supporting material that proves, such charge in its evidentiary value has strength. Anyone who utters the word 'corruption' or alleges corruption or mentions violation of human rights does not become entitled to get information from Public Authorities exempted u/s 24(1) of the RTI Act.
In view of the above, submission of the CPIO is upheld by the Commission.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Advisory to DG BRO BRO is exempt under RTI Act to provide information except in cases of allegations of corruption and human right violations. It is incumbent on the part of the Organisation to ensure that there is probity and transparency in functioning of Mess for different ranks so that satisfactory service is provided to the employees. DG BRO may take corrective measures to ensure the above.
(Divya Prakash Sinha) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy (H P Sen) Dy. Registrar/Designated Officer Copy To-4
DG BRO 5