Central Information Commission
Dr. D Dhaya Devadas vs Department Of Atomic Energy on 21 November, 2011
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SM/A/2011/000785/SG/15786
Appeal No. CIC/SM/A/2011/000785/SG
Relevant facts emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Dr. D. Dhaya Devadas,
1A, Prasad Street,
Seethapathy Nagar,
Velachery, Chennai - 600042
Respondent : Mt. T. S. Sunil Kumar
PIO & Scientific Officer (G) AMDER, Dept. of Atomic Energy, Begumpet, Hyderbad - 500016 RTI application filed on : 23/10/2010 PIO replied on : 24/11/2010 First Appeal filed on : 04/01/2011 First Appellate Authority order of : Not enclosed Second Appeal received on : 25/02/2011 Sl. Information sought Reply of PIO a. Photo copies of the evidences to show the exact Information sought has already been quantities of heavy minerals deposited in the areas asked vide Appellant's earlier letter dated between the high tide line and low tide line. 09/10/2009. Information was provided b. Photo copies of the evidences to show that the said vide letter dated 13/10/2009. Further, heavy minerals will be deposited away from the high xerox copies of evidences proving tide line that too in the inland private patta land, replenishment of Garnet, Rutile, Ilmenite, where there is no possibility of entering of sea etc showing the exact quantities deposited waves. between the High Tide Line and Low c. Photo copies of internationally accepted procedures Tide Line are not available with this to estimate the quantum of the replenishment of office. heavy materials between the areas of high tide line Furthermore, as per Commission's and low tide in the sea shore. decision CIC/SM/A/2010/000114 115 and d. Photo copies of the internationally accepted papers 119 dated 16/07/2010, all xerox copies as evidences to prove the possibility of heavy have already been provided to you vide minerals available in the adjacent patta lands that too letter dated 14/10/2010. 50 m away from the river or stream beds, where As regards queries 3 and 4, the Appellant there is no possibility of any overflow of water from may consult library literature. the river or stream.
Grounds for First Appeal:
Dissatisfied with information provided. Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
Not enclosed.
Ground for Second Appeal:
Dissatisfied with information provided.Page 1 of 2
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present Appellant : Mr. John Solomon representing Dr. D. Dhaya Devadas on video conference from NIC-
Chennai Studio;
Respondent : Mt. T. S. Sunil Kumar, PIO & Scientific Officer (G) on video conference from NIC-
Hyderabad Studio;
The PIO has stated that the information being sought is not on the records of the Public Authority. He states that studies of the nature which would yield information sought by the Appellant are not carried out by the Department. The Appellant states that various mining plans are approved by the Department and questions the basis on which the said mining plans have been approved by the Department. This Commission is not in a position to adjudicate on this and has no jurisdiction in this matter. The Commission accepts the contention of the respondent that the information sought is not available with the Public Authority. The Appellant also states that the respondent should give information on query 3 & 4. Query 3 & 4 require the PIO to give internationally accepted procedures. This cannot be considered information available with the Public Authority and requires the PIO to give an assessment of what is an internationally accepted procedure.
Decision:
The Appeal is disposed.
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 21 November 2011 (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (pr) Page 2 of 2