Central Information Commission Judgements

Sh. Bankey Bihari Sonthalia vs Rail Coach Factory on 9 September, 2009

Central Information Commission
Sh. Bankey Bihari Sonthalia vs Rail Coach Factory on 9 September, 2009
               Central Information Commission
                        2nd Floor, August Kranti Bhawan,
                    Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi - 110 066
                            Website: www.cic.gov.in


                                                 Decision No.4464/IC(A)/2009

                                                     F. No.CIC/OK/C/2008/00696

                                              Dated, the 09th September, 2009


Name of the Appellant:             Sh. Bankey Bihari Sonthalia

Name of the Public Authority:      Rail Coach Factory


Facts

:

1. The appellant has sought access to the decision making process and
the documents relied upon to take a final decision for procurement of certain
material. Specifically, he has asked for the minutes of the tender committee,
performance report, technical scrutiny notes, etc.

2. The CPIO has refused to furnish the information u/s 8(1) (d) & 11(1) of
the Act on the ground that the information asked for relate to Commercial
confidence, the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of
third party.

3. In his appeal before the Commission, the appellant has stated that he
has merely asked for the minutes of the tender committee and other
documents, on the basis of which procurement related decision were taken by
the respondent. He has not asked for documents submitted by the third party.
He has, therefore, pleaded for providing the information asked for.

1

Decision:

4. A citizen has the right to observe and scrutinize the decision making
process by the public authority, particularly after the action is complete and
over. In view of this, there is no justification for withholding the information
relating to the finalisation of the awards of tenders, bids, which follows an
established procedure. The denial of information u/s 8(1) (d) and/or 11(1) of
the Act is, therefore, untenable.

5. The CPIO is therefore directed to furnish the information asked for
within 15 days from the date of issue of this decision, failing which penalty
proceeding u/s 20(1) of the Act would be initiated.

6. The appellant would also be free to inspect the documents on a date
and time convenient to both the parties.

7. The appeal is thus disposed of.

Sd/-

(Prof. M.M. Ansari)
Central Information Commissioner

Authenticated true copy:

(M.C. Sharma)
Assistant Registrar

Name & address of Parties:

1. Sh. Bankey Bihari Sonthalia, C/o. Samson Printing Works, 1/7
Doctor’s Lane, Gole Market, New Delhi – 110 001.

2. The Public Information Officer, Rail Coach Factory, Hussainpur,
Kapurthala – 144 602 (Punjab).

3. The Appellate Authority & Chief Design Engineer, Rail Coach
Factory, Hussainpur, Kapurthala – 144 602.

2