Central Information Commission
CIC/AD/A/2009/001297
Dated October 21, 2009
Name of the Applicant : Shri Mangal Singh Arya
Name of the Public Authority : MTNL, New Delhi
Background
1. The Applicant filed an RTI application dt.27.6.09 with the CPIO, MTNL, New
Delhi requesting for information against 7 points related to the security
agencies cleared by TEC to provide security personnel in GM (East) area for
the period 2009-2011 including names of the agencies, minutes of meetings,
dates on which each agreement was signed etc. The CPIO replied on 24.7.09
informing the Applicant that as per the advice of the legal cell, MTNL, New
Delhi information sought relates to a sub judice case filed by the CBI and the
investigation is still under progress and therefore information cannot be
provided u/s 8(1)(h). Not satisfied with the reply, the Applicant filed an
appeal dt.28.7.09 stating that investigation is being completed and
chargesheets submitted by the CBI in Tis Hazari Court and that information
sought is the only material evidence to prove that he is innocent and falsely
implicated. On not receiving any reply from the Appellate Authority, the
Applicant filed a second appeal dt.8.9.09 before CIC requesting for
recommendation of the TEC and approval of the competent authority to award
the security contract to M/s.REACH security agency for the year 2009-2011 in
MTNL (East).
2. The Bench of Mrs. Annapurna Dixit, Information Commissioner scheduled the
hearing for October 21, 2009.
3. Shri Himanshu Kumar, CPIO, Shri A.K.Gupta, SDE representing Appellate
Authority, Shri Bangala Babu and Shri B.M.Sharma represented the Public
Authority
4. The Applicant was present during the hearing
Decision
5. After hearing both the parties, the Commission observed that the information
sought by the Appellant has been wrongly denied to him under Section
8(1)(h) as, as per the submission of the Appellant, the investigation has
already been completed and the chargesheet issued. The Commission is of
the opinion that since the agreement entered into with the Security Agency
and which is being sought by the Appellant relates to the use of public
money for providing security to MTNL offices, and since any such agreement
should, therefore, be placed in the public domain, and also since the
investigation has been completed, the information sought by the Appellant
may be provided to him by the CPIO by 10.11.09, under intimation to the
Commission.
6. The appeal is accordingly disposed of.
(Annapurna Dixit)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy:
(G. Subramanian)
Assistant Registrar
Cc:
1. Shri Mangal Singh Arya
R/o C-30/2, Street No.1
Khazuri Khas
Delhi 110 094
2. The CPIO
Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited
O/o General manager (East)
Jawaharlal Nehru Marg
New Delhi
3. The Appellate Authority
Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited
O/o Chief General Manager (O)
K.L.Bhawan, Janpath
New Delhi
4. Officer in charge, NIC
4. Press E Group, CIC