Central Information Commission
Asif Khan vs Agricultural And Processed Food ... on 4 March, 2025
केन्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ मागग, मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई निल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
File No: CIC/APPEA/A/2023/143522
Asif Khan .....अपीलकर्ता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनतम
CPIO
Agricultural and Processed Food
Products Export Development
Authority 3rd Floor, NCUI Building
3, Siri Institutional Area,
August Kranti Marg,
Opp. Asiad Village, ....प्रतर्वतदीगण /Respondent
New Delhi - 110016
Date of Hearing : 24.02.2025
Date of Decision : 03.03.2025
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : VINOD KUMAR TIWARI
Relevant facts emerging from appeal :
RTI application filed on : 07.08.2023
CPIO replied on : 04.09.2023
First appeal filed on : 26.09.2023
First Appellate Authority's order : 17.10.2023
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 30.10.2023
Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 07.08.2023 (offline) seeking the following information:Page 1 of 8
1. कतर्तालर् कृषि और प्रसंस्कृर् खतद्र् उत्पतद तनर्तार् षवकतस प्रतधिकरण में रजिस्टर्ा NOP कंपतनर्तं, लैटेक्स, वन्सटा , इकोसटा , एस.आर.एस., फूर्सेफ आईर्ी, मतर्अर्ा के द्वतरत 01 अप्रैल 2021 से 31 मतर्ा 2023 र्क जिनकी भी NOP ितरी की गई है र्र्त इनके द्वतरत िो पत्रक एपीर्त कतर्तालर् में िमत ककए गए समस्र् की सत्र् प्रमतणणर् छतर्तप्रतर् प्रदतन करें ।
The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 04.09.2023 stating as under:
र्ह आपके ददनतंक 07 अगस्र् 2023 के पत्र के संदभा में है िो एपीर्त को ददनतंक 11 अगस्र् 2023 को प्रतप्र् हुआ है । आपके द्वतरत अपेक्षिर् ितनकतरी तनम्न अनुसतर है :-
क्रम वििरण कारर िाई संख्या कतर्तालर् में कृषि और प्रसंस्कृर् खतद्र् उत्पतद तनर्तार् षवकतस प्रतधिकरण में आपके द्वतरत अपेक्षिर् रजिस्टर्ा NOP कंपतनर्तं, लैटेक्स, वन्सटा , ितनकतरी व्र्जक्र्गर् सूर्नत इकोसटा , एस.आर.एस., फूर्सेफ आईर्ी, है , िो सूर्नत कत अधिकतर
1. मतर्अर्ा के द्वतरत 01 अप्रैल 2021 से 31 अधितनर्म की ितरत 8 (1) (j) मतर्ा 2023 र्क जिनकी भी एनओपी ितरी के र्हर् (j) अपवतद प्रतवितन की गई है र्र्त इनके द्वतरत िो पत्रक से छूट प्रतप्र् है ।
एपीर्त कतर्तालर् में िमत ककए गए समस्र् की सत्र् प्रमतणणर् छतर्तप्रतर् प्रदतन करें ।
Being dissatisfied, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 26.09.2023. The FAA vide its order dated 17.10.2023, held as under.
This is with reference to your Appeal dated 26th September 2023 received at APEDA on 4th October 2023 seeking information on certification bodies under NOP.
The information sought pertains to third party, commercial confidentiality and also fiduciary in nature under section 8 (1) (D) & (E) of the RTI Act 2005.
Page 2 of 8Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Present through video conference. Respondent: Ms. Swati Bose, General Manager/FAA and Shri Subasty P., PIO, appeared in person.
The appellant inter alia, reiterated his request for disclosure of the information sought by him. He submitted that information sought was arbitrarily denied by the respondent.
The Respondent, defended their stance, affirming that the requested information is protected under section 8 (1) (d) & (e) of the RTI Act. The respondent submitted that they had filed detailed written submissions dated 11.02.2025 stating complete facts of the case and requested the Commission to place the same on record. The relevant paras of the written submission are reproduced as under:
"This is with reference to the RTI application dated 07.08.2023 received at APEDA on 11.08.2023 from Mr. Asif Khan, Patrkar, Hadkai Jinning, Kajipur, Khargone. The response to the RTI Application was sent by CPIO vide letter dated 04.09.2023.
The information sought in the RTI Application pertains to organic certification under the US organic regulation NOP (National Organic Programme) of the USDA by certain Certification Bodies accredited under NOP (namely Letis, Onecert, Ecocert, SRS, Foodchain ID, Mayacert) from 1st April 2021 to 31st March 2023.
National Programme for Organic Production (NPOP) is the regulatory requirement for export of organic products from India. India's NPOP had a recognition of conformity assessment with USDA-NOP that was withdrawn in January 2021 with a transition period of 18 months."
The respondent has filed another detailed a written submissions dated 24.02.2025 wherein they made additional points to defend their case, copy of Page 3 of 8 the same was marked to the appellant. The relevant paras of the written submission are reproduced as under:
"National Programme for Organic Production (NPOP) is the regulatory requirement for export of organic products from the Country.
It is being implemented by the Department of Commerce, Ministry of Commerce & industry, Govt of India for exports and is notified under the Foreign Trade Development Regulations (FTDR) Act 1992 since 2001.
The NPOP provides Standards for organic production systems, criteria and procedure for accreditation of Certification Bodies, inspection and certification of operators and the National (India Organic) Logo and the regulations governing its use.
The standards and procedures under the NPOP have been formulated in harmony with other International Standards regulating import and export of organic products.
The institutional mechanism involves a third-party certification system of organic processes and organic produce is certified across the supply chain by a certification body (Govt. or private) duly accredited by the National Accreditation Body (NAB) operating under NPOP.
The Certification Bodies register the operators that can be producers, processors or traders, conduct inspections and issue certificate to the operators.
The NAB accredits Certification Bodies under NPOP and they are monitored periodically for maintaining a uniform and credible system of certification. Presently, there are 37 active Certification Bodies, which include 14 State Certification Bodies.
APEDA has been designated as the secretariat for implementation of the NPOP. The NPOP standards for crop production have been recognized by the European Commission and Switzerland as equivalent to their country's standards and is also accepted by Great Britain. MRA for organic products with Taiwan has been implemented. w.e.f. 08.07.2024. Negotiations for an MRA with Australia are at an advanced stage and in process with South Korea and Japan.Page 4 of 8
In line with the global requirements and also based on the recognition agreements signed with India by the importing countries such as European Union and Switzerland, APEDA, as Secretariat of NPOP follows ISO 17011.
As per ISO 17011 Clause 8.1.1, all the information obtained during the accreditation process is considered as proprietary information and regarded as confidential.
Confidentiality under ISO 17011 Norms:
As per the internationally recognized ISO 17011 standard, accreditation processes involve sensitive data, including internal assessments, compliance reports, and evaluations conducted by accreditation bodies. These records are maintained under confidentiality protocols to uphold the integrity of the accreditation framework and recognition agreements.
Fiduciary Nature of the Information:
The information involving third-party accreditation bodies that operate under a regulatory framework requires fiduciary responsibility to maintain the relationship of trust and responsibility between the accredited certification body, the accreditation body/regulatory authority, as well as the trading partner countries, thereby falling within the exemption provided under Section 8(1)(e) of the RTI Act.
The RTI requests of the Appellant pertains to organic regulation of USA i.e USDA NOP, accreditation for which is granted by USDA NOP, department of a foreign government. APEDA is not authorized to provide any information pertaining to activities of a foreign Government's department.
The details and documentation of accreditation of certification bodies are maintained with the respective accreditation body of that Country and confidentiality maintained In this case, the certification bodies whose details have been sought are not even accredited under NPOP except Onecert and Ecocert.
In the past India had a conformity assessment recognition with USDA and under the agreement, accreditation for NOP was granted by APEDA Page 5 of 8 to NPOP Certification bodies. As per the agreement APEDA was required to maintain the requirements of ISO 17011. The agreement ended in Jan 2021 with transition period which ended after 18 months.
APEDA is not the custodian of information related to USDA NOP and not authorized to provide any information pertaining to the same.
Past RTIs by the appellant and decision of CIC The appellant had in the past sought information pertaining to activities of the third-party accredited certification bodies, certificates issued by them to their operators etc which was not disclosed due to obligations of APEDA in its regulatory role in accreditation process requiring fiduciary responsibility and commitment to maintain confidentiality.
The Hon'ble Information Commission had upheld the response provided by the respondent (APEDA) in the eight appeals. The file numbers are given below:
SA File Nos. Date of Hearing Date of
Decision
1 CIC/APPEA/A/2023/137748+ 13/10/2023 13/10/2023
2 CIC/APPEA/A/2023/113006 25/07/2022 25/07/2022
3 CIC/APPEA/A/2021/137736
4 CIC/APPEA/A/2021/141548
5 CIC/APPEA/A/2021/141550
6 CIC/APPEA/A/2021/141551
7 CIC/APPEA/A/2021/152771
8 CIC/APPEA/A/2021/152772
Most respectfully, the respondent prays for the Hon'ble Information Commission to kindly consider the legal and regulatory framework governing accreditation processes, the fiduciary nature of the information (section 8(1) e) and commercial confidentiality involved (section 8(1) d) and information with respect to foreign Government (section 8(1) (f) with respect to the information sought."Page 6 of 8
Decision:
The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both the parties and perusal of the records, noted that the respondent has replied to the RTI application, and the first appeal vide letters dated 04.09.2023 and 17.10.2023 respectively. The respondent filed detailed written submissions dated 11.02.2025 and 24.02.2025, copies of the same were marked to the appellant. The content of the same is reproduced in the above paras.
The respondent submitted that requested information include third-party commercial data and fiduciary information, which are protected under Sections 8(1)(d) and 8(1)(e) of the RTI Act. The FAA's reasoning aligns with the provisions of the RTI Act, which upholds the confidentiality of business-related information and third-party interests. No larger public interest has been demonstrated by the Appellant to override the exemptions provided under the RTI Act.
In view of the above observations, the Commission finds that replies as well as the written submissions given by the respondents are in consonance with the provisions of the RTI Act and intervention of the Commission is not warranted in the matter.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Vinod Kumar Tiwari (विनोद कुमार वििारी) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयुक्त) Authenticated true copy (अनिप्रमानित सत्यानित प्रनत) (S. Anantharaman) Dy. Registrar 011- 26181927 Date Page 7 of 8 Copy To:
The FAA Agricultural and Processed Food Products Export Development Authority 3rd Floor, NCUI Building 3, Siri Institutional Area, August Kranti Marg, Opp. Asiad Village, New Delhi - 110016 Page 8 of 8 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)