CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
D- Wing, 2nd Floor,
August Kranti Bhavan, Bhikaji Cama Place,
New Delhi - 110066
Appeal No.CIC/SS/A/2011/000462
PARTIES TO THE CASE:
Appellant : Mr B Mohan
Respondent : Ministry of Chemicals & Fertilizers
Date of Decision : 6.7.2011
Appellant represented by - Appellant in person
Respondent represented by - Shri Shiv Narain, Director.
Shri K. Sensarma, Director
ORDER
BACKGROUND OF THE CASE
1. Date of RTI Application – 13/09/2010
Date of PIO’s Reply – 11/10/2010
Date of First Appeal – 22/08/2010
Date of First Appellate Authority’s Order – 25/11/2010
2. The Appellant through his RTI Application had sought the following
information from the Respondent/Public Authority :
“(a). What are the formulations (with name of the companies) which were
being marketed In violation of Para 8 (6) of the DPCO,1955 for which prices
were fixed by the NPPA in the year 2008 and what are the prices fixed by the
NPPA.
(b). Whether control samples of these formulations (involved in para 8 (6)
violation cases) were collected from the companies and whether any notice
issued to the concerned companies and If control sample were not collected and
no notice was issued to the companies, what were the reasons for that.”
3. The PIO in his order dated 11/10/2010 referred to the appellants’ earlier RTI
application which the appellant has filed on 28/06/2010 and relied as follows:
“In your original dated 28/06/2010, you have not mentioned either any
specific name of the formulation or any prices of the formulation which is more
than 8 to 10 times as claimed in your RTI application dated 28/06/2010.
However whatever information is available with the NPPA has already been
provided to you.”
4. Aggrieved by the order of the PIO, the appellant went into the appeal before
the First Appellate Authority (FAA). The FAA upheld the order of the PIO by
stating, “It may be seen that in the reply by the CPIO, it has been clearly stated that
the said details/information solicited by you were furnished vide this office letter
no. 23011/07/(232)/09-Admn dated 30/07/2010. However, copy of the above said
letter is enclosed for ready reference.”
In the second appeal filed before the Commission, the appellant has pleaded
that precise and specific information has not been provided to him in response to
his RTI application.
DECISION NOTICE:
5. The Commission has carefully considered the submissions of the parties.
Both the CPIO as well as the Appellate Authority have neither provided the
requested information to the Appellant nor have they stated the reasons for not
providing the information in accordance with Section 4 (1) (d) of the RTI Act. The
Commission is of the view that this amounts to denial of information on the part of
the CPIO. The information sought by the Appellant is not exempt under any of the
provisions of RTI Act or even if it is so, still the CPIO as well as the FAA were
mandated to provide reasons for the same in their respective orders. To our dismay,
that has not been done.
6. The Commission sees no reason that why this information should be denied
to the Appellant. The Commission hereby direct the CPIO to provide the Appellant
the abovementioned requested information within 10 days from the receipt of this
order.
7. The appeal is disposed of with the above directions.
Sd/-
Sushma Singh
Information Commissioner