Central Information Commission
Er. A. K. Bhatnagar vs Border Security Force (Bsf) on 19 August, 2009
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Appeal No.CIC/WB/A/2008/00169 dated 12.1.2008
Right to Information Act 2005 - Section 19
Appellant - Er. A. K. Bhatnagar
Respondent - Border Security Force (BSF)
Decision announced : 19.8.2009
Facts:
By an application of 10.5.07 Er. A. K. Bhatnagar of Kadamtala Distt. Darjeeling (WB) applied to DIG BSF Kishanganj seeking the following information:
"You are requested building for my information by 21st may, 2007 please:
i) Copy of A/A & E/S accorded by CA.
ii) Copy of Technical sanction accorded by CEA.
iii) Copy of award letter issued to contractor etc.
iv) Copy of completion certificate issued by CEA.
v) Completion cost of the building.
vi) Mode of execution of work.
In case reply/ documents are not received by the due date it will be presumed that above work is executed by your HQ/ unit concerned in advance without accord of A/A & E/S as well as completing codal formalities please."
To this Er. A. K. Bhatnagar received a response on 4.6.07 from Shri Vinay Kumar, Dy. Commandant (Admn) Panjipara (West Bengal) refusing the information under Para 24 of Chapter VI of the RTI Act. Er. Bhatnagar then moved an appeal before Shri Vinay Kumar with the following plea:
"With reference to contents of your letter it is to state that the Chief Information Commission, Shri Wajahat Habibullah in his order has ruled and substantiates this by elaborating that in case of quotations, bids or tender or any other information prior to conclusion of a contract, it could be categorized as trade secret, but once concluded the confidentiality of such transaction can not be claimed. Further Secretary, Tripura Information Commissioner Agartala vide his letter No. F 4(2)-SCIC/TIC/2006/512 dated 23rd May, 2007 has intimated that BSF is an organization of Govt. of 1 India as such it is within the jurisdiction of Central Information Commission."
On not receiving a response, Er. A. K. Bhatnagar had then moved an appeal before us with the following prayer:
"In above case I want to confirm as to whether my request under RTI Act 2005 was legal or ignorable in the light of Para 24 of chapter VI of RTI Act 2005. In case my request was genuine, what action against such corruption committed by DIG may be taken. In case I have adopted some wrong procedure in operating RTI Act 2005, I may kindly be advised regarding procedure to be followed for getting reply without making bulky correspondence. Further it would be highly appreciated if a list of public Information Officer declared by BSF, if any, is furnished to me for getting information from them please."
Subsequently Er. Bhatnagar has moved another petition before us on 24.12.07 with the following plea:
"In view of above, I am once again approaching your good self to kindly direct concerned authority to send requisite documents to me at their earliest possible i.e. by 25th January 2008 positively so that I may produce the same before the court and Hon'ble Home Minister of India to prove my innocence and for ends of Justice please.' The appeal was heard by videoconference on 19.8.09. Sh. R. K. Saini, Asstt. Cmdt. BSF & Law Officer is present at NIC Studio, Agartala: Although informed of the hearing through a notice of August 7, 2009, Er. Bhatnagar is not present at the NIC studio either in Jalpaiguri or in Panjipara.
DECISION NOTICE We find that in his prayer before us what Er. Bhatnagar is seeking is only the position in law with regard to moving an RTI application in the BSF. Sec. 24 cited by the Dy. Cmdt. in refusing Er. Bhatnagar's request of 7.6.07 reads as follows in respect of organizations listed in the Second Schedule.:2
"(1) Nothing contained in this Act shall apply to the intelligence and security organisations specified in the Second Schedule, being organizations established by the Central Government or any information furnished by such organizations to that Government:
Provided that the information pertaining to the allegations of corruption and human rights violations shall not be excluded under this sub-section:
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 forty-five days from the date of the receipt of request.
(2) The Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, amend the Schedule by including therein any other intelligence or security organization established by that Government or omitting there from any organization already specified therein and on the publication of such notification, such organization shall be deemed to be included in or, as the case may be, omitted from the Schedule.
BSF is an organization listed at Sr. No. 9 of the Second Schedule as on date. Application for information, therefore, can only be made on the conditions laid down under the proviso quoted above. It is agreed that the application of Er Bhatnagar caries implications that might be construed a corruption. But I is also clear that there are in fact no such allegations. However, Er. A. K. Bhatnagar is advised that if he wishes to make such an application, he may do so to CPIO Shri Sanjay Singh, Principal Staff Officer and DIG, BSF, Agartala.
With the above clarification, the present appeal, not falling within the jurisdiction of the RTI Act is hereby dismissed.
3Announced in the hearing. Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
(Wajahat Habibullah) Chief Information Commissioner 19.8.2009 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.
(Pankaj Shreyaskar) Joint Registrar 19.8.2009 4