Central Information Commission
Mr.Kamal Kishore Arora vs Ministry Of Commerce And Industry on 30 August, 2012
Central Information Commission
Room No. 305, 2nd Floor, 'B' Wing, August Kranti Bhavan,
Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi110066
Web: www.cic.gov.in Tel No: 26167931
Case No. CIC/SS/A/2012/000074
Dated: 30.08.2012
Name of Appellant : Shri Kamal Kishore Arora
Name of Respondent : Ministry of Commerce & Industry
Department of IPP
Date of Hearing : 13.08.2012
ORDER
Shri Kamal Kishore Arora, hereinafter called the appellant has filed the present appeal dated 20.6.2011 before the Commission against the respondent Ministry of Commerce & Industry, Department of Industrial Policy & Promotion, New Delhi of for not providing complete information in reply to his RTI-application dated 7.4.2011. The matter came up for hearing on 13.08.2012. The appellant was absent whereas the respondent were represented by Ms. Chandni Raina, Director and Shri Alok Mukhopadhyay, Deputy Secretary.
2. The appellant through his application dated 7.4.2011 seeking information on the following six queries: "(a) Total number of orders (as passed by Ms. S. Usha after her assuming the duties to function as the Hon'ble Chairman of Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB), Chennai till date; (b) All the relevant documents along with the requisite application as made by the said Ms. S. Usha for appointment as Technical Member of the IPAB; (c) All the documents comprising of the detailed particulars of appearance of the said Ms. S. Usha while conducting the legal proceedings in various forums/courts for a period of at 2 Case No. CIC/SS/A/2012/000074 least ten years as an Advocate of a proven specialized experience in trade mark law in corroboration of her qualification in terms of mandatory provisions of law as embodied u/s 85(4) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999; (d) Valid reasons and valid ground for her appointment as a Technical Member of IPAB; (e) Name(s), designation and qualification(s) of the person(s) Officer(s) and/or members of the Committee for her such appointment as Technical Member; and (f) Criteria, procedure and/or process for appointment of a Member, Technical Member, Judicial Member, Vice Chairman and Chairman of the IPAB." Besides, and vide its same application, the appellant also desired to be intimated as to whether the said Ms. S. Usha had straightway been selected for the post of Technical Member merely on the basis of her statement of practicing as an Advocate in trade mark law or after thorough perusal of all the relevant/necessary documents and also as to whether she passed any formal interview therefore or not. The appellant desired this query to be satisfied by way of proper reply supported by all the necessary documents. The CPIO vide his letter No. 7(6)/2006-IPR.I (IPAB) dated 20.4.2011 transferred the Point No. (a) to the CPIO, IPAB, Chennai for furnishing requisite information to the appellant directly. On remaining points the CPIO vide letter dated 9.5.2011 informed the appellant as follows: "(b) and
(c) Copies of relevant documents provided to the appellant; (d) Appointment of Ms. S. Usha as based on the recommendations of the Selection Committee; (e) A Selection Committee approved by Minister consisted of Dr. Ajay Dua, Secretary Deptt of IPP as Chairman, Shri R.L. Meena, Secretary, D/Legal Affairs and Shri A.N. Tiwari, Secretary, DOPT as Member for selection of Ms. S. Usha;
(f) As per Section 85(6) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, Chairman, IPAB is appointed on recommendation of Chief Justice of India subject to approval of Appointment Committee of Cabinet (ACC). Presently, as per Section 85(2), Section 85(4) of Trade Marks Act and Section 116(2) Patents Act, Vice-Chairman and Technical Member (Trade Marks) and Technical Member (Patents) are respectively selected among the candidates who apply for the post by the Search-cum-Selection Committee approved by DOPT comprising of Secretary, D/IPP as Chairman and Chairman, IPAB, Secretary, D/Legal Affairs and Director 3 Case No. CIC/SS/A/2012/000074 General of Council of Scientific and Industrial Research by conducting interview and recommendations of Committee is subject to approval of Commerce & Industry Minister and ACC. On last query the appellant has been provided with the Minutes of the Selection Committee Meeting held on 23.11.2005.
3. Aggrieved with the reply of the CPIO, the appellant filed first-appeal on 19.5.2011 before the FAA. The FAA vide his order No. 7/6/2006/PR-1/PAB dated 30.5.2011 concurred with the reply of the CPIO.
4. In his second appeal filed before the Commission the appellant submits that the CPIO has not furnished complete and specific information along with documents.
5. During the hearing the respondent submit that at no stage has any effort been made to conceal or suppress any facts from the appellant, whatever information was available, has already been provided to him.
6. Having considered the submissions of the parties and perused the relevant documents on file, the Commission is of the view that requisite information as per record and permissible under the RTI Act has been provided to the appellant by the respondent.
(Sushma Singh) Information Commissioner 4 Case No. CIC/SS/A/2012/000074 Authenticated true copy:
(K.K. Sharma) OSD & Deputy Registrar Address of the parties:
Shri Kamal Kishore Arora, M/s. Arora Registration Service, No. 1158, Bazar Old Kanak Mandi, Amritsar-143006 (Punjab) The CPIO (IPR-I), Ministry of Commerce & Industry, Department of Industrial Policy & Promotion, Udyog Bhawan, New Delhi.
The First Appellate Authority, Ministry of Commerce & Industry, Department of Industrial Policy & Promotion, Udyog Bhawan, New Delhi.