Central Information Commission
2nd Floor, August Kranti Bhawan,
Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi - 110 066
Website: www.cic.gov.in
Decision No.4002/IC(A)/2009
F. Nos.CIC/MA/A/2009/000326
CIC/MA/A/2009/000328
CIC/MA/A/2009/000329
Dated, the 20th May, 2009
Name of the Appellant: 1. Shri. Nirav Tarkas
2. Col. (Rtd.) D.S. Sachar
3. Yeshwant Gangadhar Patwardhan
Name of the Public Authority: The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India
i
Facts
:
1. The appellants have submitted separate appeals before the Commission
against the decisions of the CPIO and the Appellate Authority of the respondent.
The parties were heard separately on 20/5/2009.
2. The appellants have submitted separate complaints against different
parties, which are identified in their respective applications. In this context, they
have sought for information about the manner in which their complaints have
been investigated and the documents on the basis of which the respondent has
taken decision to prove the alleged charges made by them.
3. The CPIO and the Appellate Authority have duly replied and furnished the
information, except the copies of comments/rejoinders submitted by the parties
against whom complaints were made. The CPIO and the Appellate Authority
have made attempts to clarify the issues raised by the appellants, who are
however, not satisfied. Hence, the separate appeals before the Commission.
Since the appellant’s complaints are almost identical, the appeals are examined
together for the sake of convenience.
i
“If you don’t ask, you don’t get.” – Mahatma Gandhi
1
4. In the case of each appellant, the details of information asked for and the
replies given by the respondent were discussed during the hearing to determine
the extent of transparency in investigation of complaints against the Chartered
Accountants for violation of professional ethics, as stipulated by the respondent.
Decision:
5. In all the instant appeals, the appellants have sought to know the manner
in which their complaints have been investigated. They have also sought for
access to the documents mainly, the submissions made by the concerned
parties, against whom complaints have been made by the appellants and other
documents on the basis of which the respondent has disposed of the complaint
cases. In view of the fact that the CPIO and the Appellate Authority have duly
replied and furnished the requested information, though the appellants are not
satisfied, it would be appropriate to allow the appellants to inspect the relevant
records and files pertaining to the processing of their complaint cases.
6. The CPIO is, therefore, directed to allow inspection of the relevant
documents, so as to enable the appellants to see for themselves as to how the
complaints submitted by them were enquired into. They would also be free to
examine the submissions made by the concerned parties as well as the
observations made by the respondent for drawing relevant inferences in the
matter of complaints.
7. The CPIO and the individual appellant(s) should mutually decide a
convenient date and time for inspection of the relevant records within one month
from the date of issue of this decision. The appellants would be free to identify
the documents, which should be furnished to them as per the provisions of the
Act.
8. All the appeals are thus disposed of.
Sd/-
(Prof. M.M. Ansari)
Central Information Commissioner ii
Authenticated true copy:
(M.C. Sharma)
Assistant Registrar
ii
“All men by nature desire to know.” – Aristotle
2
Name & address of Parties:
1. Shri. Nirav A Tarkas, 209, B.N. Chambers, R.C. dutta Road, Vadodara –
390 005.
2. Col. D.S. Sachar, K. No.47, Phase-3-B-1, Mohali – 160 059
3. Shri. Yeshwant Gangadhar Patwardhan, 9 Yashshree Apartments,
Kohinoor Colony, Sahakar Nagar-II, Pune-400 009.
4. Shri. V. Sagar, CPIO, ICAI, ICAI Bhawan, I.P. Marg, New Delhi – 110 002.
5. Shri. T. Karthikeyan, Appellate Authority, ICAI Bhawan, I.P. Marg, New
Delhi – 110 002.
3