Central Information Commission
Mr.Satya Pal vs Government Of Nct Of Delhi on 9 December, 2010
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2009/002760/6073Adjunct
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2009/002760
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Satya Pal
6/42 DESU Colony,
Janak Puri, New Delhi - 1100058
Respondent : Mr. K. V. S. Katoch
Public Information Officer & Assistant Director
Government of NCT of Delhi
Department of Power
8th Level, B-Wing, Delhi Secretariat,
I.P.Estate, New Delhi
RTI application filed on : 07/07/2009
PIO replied : 10/09/2009
First appeal filed on : 18/08/2009
First Appellate Authority order : 15/09/2009
Second Appeal received on : 29/10/2009
Date of Notice of Hearing : 24/11/2009
Hearing Held on : 24/12/2009
Information Sought:
1. Are DISCOMS (Joint venture companies of GNCTD) namely BSES Yamuna Power Ltd., BSES Rajdhani
Power Ltd., and North Delhi Power Ltd. that are managed by private companies BSES and TATA
incorporated as per section 14(1) of the Companies Act?
2. Have they been set up with the approval of the government as per section 14(6) of the Companies Act?
3. Copies of (if set up):
• Certificate of incorporation of the above companies.
• Notification of the government in regard to formation of joint venture companies of GNCTD.
• Notification by the government for appointment of effective date of transfer of assets, liabilities,
etc. from DISCOMS to the aforementioned joint venture companies.
• Notification depicting joint venture companies as successor entities of erstwhile DVB.
4. Copies of (if not set up):
• Gazette notification which necessitated issue of license to DISCOMS.
• Date of transfer of assets, liabilities, etc. from DISCOMS to the aforementioned joint venture
companies.
5. On 01/07/2002 were the DISCOMS vested with crores of assets apart from buildings, lands and flats
handed over for a lease of Rs. 1/- for 25 years without any legal binding documents.
6. Copy of share agreement between DISCOMS and private companies namely BSES and TATA.
Reply of the PIO (after first appeal had been filed):
1. The mentioned companies had been incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, and
have changed their name after the approval of the Board of Directors. A copy of the Policy Directions was
enclosed.
2. The transfer of assets and liabilities were not without legal bindings as several agreements were entered
into. A copy of the Share Acquisition Agreement and Share Facilities Agreement were enclosed.
First Appeal:
No information was provided by the PIO.
Order of the FAA:
The FAA observed that the PIO had supplied all documents available with him and disposed off the appeal.
Ground of the Second Appeal:
That the Appellant has still not been supplied with the proper information.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing on 24 December 2009:
The following were present
Appellant : Mr. Satya Pal;
Respondent : Mr. R. K. Verma, Public Information Officer DPCL;
Mr. R.S.Chauha, AG-III Department of Power;
"The PIO has provided information and some of the queries of the appellant were clarificatory in
nature. The PIO is now asked to give specific information to the following queries:
1- Certificate of incorporation of the above companies if it is with the Department.
2- Notification by the Government for formation of the JV Companies.
3- Notification by the government for appointment of effective date of transfer of assets, liabilities,
etc. from DISCOMS to the aforementioned joint venture companies.
4- Notification depicting joint venture companies as successor entities of erstwhile DVB.
5- If there is a share agreement between DISCOMS and private companies namely BSES and TATA
after 01/07/2002."
Commission's Decision dated 24 December 2009:
The Appeal was allowed.
"The PIO will give the information mentioned above to the Appellant before 05 January 2010."
Facts leading to non-compliance hearing on 09 December 2010:
The Appellant complaint about non compliance of Commission's order dated 24 December 2009. Hence the Commission decided to schedule a hearing in this matter to decide whether there has been a non- compliance of the Commission's decision.
Relevant Facts emerging during the Hearing on 09 December 2010:
The following were present Appellant : Mr. Satya Pal;
Respondent: Mr. Rakesh Chauhan on behalf of Mr. K. V. S. Katoch, PIO & AD;
The Appellant has received the information as admitted by him. He wants other information which was not as per the order of the Commission. The matter is closed at the Commission's end.
This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties. Any information in compliance with this Order will be provided free of cost as per Section 7(6) of RTI Act.
Shailesh Gandhi Information Commissioner 09 December 2010 (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(PS)