Central Information Commission
Sachin K Chavan vs Nuclear Power Corporation Of India on 23 October, 2019
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं या / Second Appeal No. CIC/NPC0I/A/2018/618166
Shri Sachin K. Chavan ... अपीलकता /Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO, Nuclear Power Corporation ... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Of India Ltd., Vikram Sarabhai
Bhavan, Central Avenue Road,
Mumbai.
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:
RTI : 28.12.2017 FA : 27.01.2018 SA : 16.05.2018
CPIO : 12.01.2018 FAO : 09.02.2018 Hearing : 15.10.2019
ORDER
1. The appellant filed an online application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd., seeking information pertaining to geological, geophysical, geomorphological, tectonic, and seismological studies done for JNPP by Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited (NPCIL) till now.
Page 1 of 52. The appellant filed a second appeal before the Commission on the grounds that the CPIO and the FAA wrongly denied the information by merely stating that the information is not in public domain wthout mentioning the relevant provisions of the RTI Act under which the information has been denied. The appellant requested the Commission to direct the CPIO to provide the information sought by him, to impose penalty on the erring officials and also to direct the CPIO to pay him compensation for denial of the information sought.
Hearing:
3. The appellant Shri Sachin K Chavan and the respondent Shri S K Shrivastava, CPIO, Addl. Chief Engineer, Nuclear Power Corporation Of India Ltd., Mumbai both attended the hearing through video conferencing.
4. The appellant submitted that the respondent has published the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) report for proposed Jaitapur Nuclear Power Park, Village Madban, District Ratnagiri, Maharashtra. Further, it was mentioned in the report under its heading as 'Disclaimer that the information contained in the EIA report is based on the scientific analysis of data/information/drawings provided by the sponsor which was NPCIL itself. Thus, it confirms that data and report on the geophysical, geomorphological, tectonic, and seismological studies prepared by the GSI was ready at the time of preparation of EIA report but the same was denied wrongly. Further, a separate RTI was also filed by the appellant with the Geological Survey of India (GSI) for obtaining the geological, tectonic, seismological studies done by the GSI for NPCIL. The GSI replied that the report and data submitted to the NPCIL by GSI was the property of the NPCIL. However, the respondent rejected the information on the ground that Page 2 of 5 the reports are not in public domain, hence cannot be furnished. Hence, the CPIO denied the information sought for without any valid reasoning in an arbitrary manner.
5. The respondent submitted that the information sought for pertains to a multi- disciplinary study done for JNPP by NPCIL. He further affirmed that all the various studies being conducted are inputs for the multi-disciplinary study undertaken by NPCIL. He further submitted that findings of the GSI submitted to NPCIL would also be a basis for additional studies that may be required for proper evaluation of the site for the proposed nuclear plant. He reiterated that the final view in the matter would be prepared after taking into consideration all the data and report received from the various institutions/experts/stakeholders. He contended that unless the report is finalized, disclosure of the information sought for would not be in public interest. He, however, stated that information that can be disclosed like EIA report has already been placed in public domain.
Decision:
6. The Commission, after hearing the submissions of the respondent and perusing the records, observes that the common man has a right to know whether due diligence has been done to ensure that all the safety analysis reports for determining the suitability of a site for establishing a nuclear plant has been done because the matter pertains to public health and public safety. Hence, larger public interest mandates the disclosure of the information sought for. The Commission, however, agrees with the respondent that in case the final report has not yet been prepared, findings of the draft report submitted to the NPCIL could be misleading, which would not be in public interest. The Commission, nevertheless, directs the Page 3 of 5 respondent to file an affidavit with the Commission deposing that the geophysical, geomorphological, tectonic, and seismological studies are yet to be finalized for JNPP by Nuclear Power Corporation of India. Hence, no information can be provided to the appellant. A copy of the affidavit shall also be provided to the appellant. The above directions of the Commission shall be complied with, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
7. With the above observations, the appeal is disposed of.
8. Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
Sd/-
Sudhir Bhargava (सुधीर भागव)व) Chief Information Commissioner (मु य सूचना आयु ) दनांक / Date 21.10.2019 Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स यािपत ित) S. S. Rohilla (एस. एस. रोिह ला) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26186535 / [email protected] Page 4 of 5 Addresses of the parties:
1. The First Appellate Authority (FAA), Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd., Vikram Sarabhai Bhawan, Central Avenue Road, Anushakti Nagar, Mumbai-400094.
2. The Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd., Vikram Sarabhai Bhawan, Central Avenue Road, Anushakti Nagar, Mumbai-400094.
3. Shri Sachin K. Chavan, Page 5 of 5