Central Information Commission Judgements

Mr. K. Balasunder vs Ministry Of Environment & Forests on 8 March, 2010

Central Information Commission
Mr. K. Balasunder vs Ministry Of Environment & Forests on 8 March, 2010
           Central Information Commission
                                                        CIC/AD/C/2009/000741
                                                           Dated 8th March, 2010

             Adjunct to the Order No.CIC/AD/C/2009/000741
                          Dated 20.11.09 in the case of
                               Mr. K. Balasunder
                                       v/s.
                     Ministry of Environment & Forests


                    Hearing was held on 8th March, 2010


1.   The Order given by the Commission on 20.11.09 in the above case is as
     follows:

     i)     After   due   consideration   of   submissions   by   both   parties,   the
            Commission directs the Appellant to provide one more set of certified
            copies of documents to the Appellant besides an affidavit on non-
            judicial stamp paper informing about the non-availability of the 10
            documents out of the 15 sought by the Appellant and the reasons for
            the same, by 25 December, 2009. The Appellant is also directed to pay
            the RTI Fee within 2 days of the date of hearing and the CPIO.


2.   The Complainant complained that he received two letters dated 11.12.09 and
     14.12.09 each enclosing papers purporting to be affidavits which are not
     affidavits in the eyes of law. They are firstly undated and secondly do not
     contain a verification or an affirmation clause and are further not attested
     such attestation being mandated by law. He also added that the contents of
     the two affidavits do not amount to statement made on oath and sworn
     before such authority as may be prescribed by law. The Complainant further
     stated that it is therefore obvious that the Respondent had all along been and

continues to be, in possession of all the fifteen documents that find mention
in the note sheet with reference to the facility and added that Respondent has
willfully and deliberately suppressed the production of all the documents
probably on account of the sensitivity of the facility and the staunch
opposition it is likely to receive from environment experts and activists on the
catastrophes it is likely to unleash in the area either during its operations or
in the event of an accident. The Respondent is therefore bound to furnish
copies of all the documents that find place in the note sheet to him.

3. The Complainant was present during the hearing.

1. Mr.E. Thirunavulukarasu, Dy. Director and Mr.Ravi, PA represented the Public
Authority.

Decision

5. The Respondent submitted during the hearing that some of 10 documents
which were initially reported as not available have since been located in the
PVC Division. No efforts were made initially to trace the documents as the
Appellant, according to the Respondent, had indicated that he wanted
information related to construction of Marine Terminal in his RTI request.
Hence the focus initially was on information available in the Division dealing
with the subject . Subsequently, after the first hearing at the Commission,
based on some references to the construction of the Marine Terminal, which
the Respondent came across in some documents in his Division, further
efforts were made to locate them and some of the desired documents were
located in the PVC Division.

5. The PIO is hence directed to provide the attested copies of the new
documents located to the Appellant besides an affidavit to the Commission
with a copy to the Appellant, as explained during the hearing, mentioning
about the non-availability of the remaining documents and stating that all
available information has been provided by the PIO. The information to be
provided within 10 days after the date of hearing and the affidavit to the
Commission by 10 April, 2010..

7. The Commission directs the PIO to showcause as to why penalty should not
be imposed upon him for not furnishing all the information available with the
Public Authority at the time of replying to the RTI application. The response to
reach the Commission by 19 April, 2010.

(Annapurna Dixit)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy:

(G. Subramanian)
Deputy Registrar
Cc:

1. Shri K.Balasundar
S/o Shri A.Krishnamurthy
#1/1445, Jawaharlal Nehru Street
Guruswamy Nagar Extension 5
Mugalivakkam
Chennai 600 116

2. The PIO
Ministry of Environment & Forests
Scientific Division
Paryavaran Bhavan
CGO Complex
Lodhi Road
New Delhi 110 003

3. The Appellate Authority

4. Officer in charge, NIC

5. Press E Group, CIC