Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Mrdilip P Shinde vs Mumbai Port Trust on 22 September, 2014

                   CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                   ROOM NO. 329, SECOND FLOOR, C-WING
                   August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place,
                               New Delhi-110066
                            Tel. No. 91-11-26717356

                                                           F.No.CIC/SS/A/2012/000108-YA

Date of Hearing                                 :       08.09.2014

Date of Decision                                    :   22.09.2014



Appellant                                       :       Shri D.P. Shinde

                                                        -rep. by Shri Rakesh,

                                                        Mumbai



Respondent                                  :           Shri E.S. Selvaraj, PIO

                                                        Mazagon Dock Limited,

                                                        Mumbai

                                                        Dr. Jayesh Vasan, Director

                                                        M/s JAL Engineers Pvt. Ltd.

                                                        Mumbai (Third Party)


Information Commissioner                    :           Shri Yashovardhan Azad

Relevant fact emerging from appeal:


 RTI Application filed on                       :       24.08.2010

 PIO replied on                                 :       17.09.2010 & 25.10.2010

 First Appeal filed on                          :       12.11.2010

 First Appellate Authority (FAA) order on       :       02.12.2010

 Second Appeal received on                      :       16.03.2011
 Information sought

:

The appellant sought information regarding pre-qualification criteria prescribed for a tender and a copy of technical bid submitted by M/s JAL Engineers Pvt. Ltd. for the same.
Relevant facts emerging during hearing:
Both parties are present along with the third party. The appellant filed an RTI application dt. 24.08.2010 seeking the above information. The PIO in his reply stated that information cannot be provided as the third party has denied the disclosure of the same. The FAA upheld the decision of the PIO.
The appellant stated that complete information should be provided to him. The respondent stated that information on Point 1 was provided to the appellant, but for Point 2, the same was denied by the third party. The respondent stated that due procedure u/s 11(3) was followed. Dr. Jayesh Vasan, Director, M/s Jal Engineers Pvt. Ltd. stated that the technical bid cannot be provided to the appellant as the same is in the nature of pure commercial information and disclosure of same will take away their competitive edge in the market. The representative of appellant stated that he wishes to know on what basis the third party was awarded the tender.
Decision:
Section 8(1)(d) of the RTI Act exempts from disclosure- "information including commercial confidence, trade secrets or intellectual property, the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of a third party, unless the competent authority is satisfied that larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information. From a plain reading of Section 8(1)(d) of the RTI Act it follows that the PIO is exempted from furnishing information including commercial confidence, trade secrets, intellectual property, the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of a third party. Therefore, in order to come within the exemption under Section 8(1)(d) of the RTI Act, the critical test to be applied is whether the disclosure of the information sought would harm the competitive position of a third party.
The PIO has not replied invoking the appropriate exemption clause u/s 8(1)(d). He has merely stated that information regarding technical bid, as denied by the third party, cannot be provided to the appellant. The PIO's reply dt. 17.09.2010, were, in effect, an order u/s 11(3) of the RTI Act.
Therefore, the Commission is of the view that the copies of technical bid of the third party cannot be provided to the appellant u/s 8(1)(d) of the RTI Act, the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of the third party.
Moreover, the appellant has not succeeded in establishing that the information sought regarding technical bid of the tender is in "larger" public interest. It being so, the information is exempted from disclosure under Sections 8(1)(d) of the RTI Act. As for the query of the appellant regarding the basis on which the third party was awarded the said tender, it being a new query, cannot be dealt with in this appeal.
With these observations, the appeal is disposed of accordingly.
(Yashovardhan Azad) 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.
(Braham Dutt Harit) Dy. Secretary & Dy. Registrar