Central Information Commission
Mr.Jagrlamoodi Rammanayudu vs Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited ... on 10 June, 2011
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Room No. 308, B-Wing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi-110066
File No.CIC/LS/A/2011/000975
Appellant : Shri J. Rama Nayudu
Respondent : Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd
Date of Hearing : 10.6.2011
Date of Decision : 10.6.2011
FACTS :
Heard today dated 10.6.2011. Appellant not present. The public authority is represented by Shri B.P. Singh, General Manager (CPIO); Shri N Ramanathan, DGM (LPG); Shri N Ramadorai, CA Mananger & Shri Mohit Bhatia, TM (LPG).
2. It is noticed that through RTI application dated 21.3.2010, the appellant had sought information on 07 paras essentially relating to the latest revised distributers price list and the latest revised MRP/RSP price list and the matters related therewith. This was responded to by the CPIO vide letter dated 15.7.2010 wherein parawise information was provided to the appellant. However, in the appeal memo filed before this Commission, the appellant has shown his dissatisfaction on the quality of information supplied to him and more particularly on the delayed supply of information which is beyond the statutory period of 30 days.
3. During the hearing, Shri Singh submits that the prices of the products are market specific and vary from market to market. The appellant has not sought information about any specific market because of which his queries can not be responded to. He submits that if the appellant were to ask information about a specific market, BPCL would be happy to supply this information to him.
4. There is no doubt that the requisite information is disclosable to the appellant. However, he needs to seek information about the specific market(s). Hence, in the facts and circumstances of the case, we deem it expedient to suggest to the appellant to get in touch with the Territorial Manager, Karnool (Andhra Pradesh) to seek any specific information on the issues raised by him in the RTI application. Shri Singh would direct the Territorial Manager to grant interview to the appellant, if so requested.
5. Before we part with this matter, we would like to observe that there has been delay of about 04 months in the response of CPIO. We are told that BPCL has only 03 CPIO located at Mumbai. IN our opinion, 03 CPIOs can not do justice to the job; considering the vast network that BPCL has all over the country. The number of CPIOs & Appellate Authorities needs to be augmented for proper servicing of the RTI Act. The Commission, therefore, suggests that the Management of BPCL may consider designating a Chief Manager/DGM level officer in each State capital as CPIO. This will not only cut down delays in responding to the RTI applications but would also improve the quality of information supplied to the information seekers. We hope and trust that the BPCL management will consider this suggestion in right earnest for proper servicing of the RTI Act.
6. A copy of this order may be sent to Chairman, BPCL for his consideration and necessary action.
Sd/-
(M.L. Sharma) Central 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.
(K.L. Das) Deputy Registrar Address of parties :-
1. Shri B.P. Singh General Manager (Mktg Corp) (CPIO), BPCL, Bharat Bhawan, 4&6 Currimbhoy Road, Ballard Estate, P.B. No 688, Mumbai-1
2. Shri Jagarlamudi Ramanayudu Near State Bank of India, Yagnasalapeta, Karamchedu-523168