CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
.....
F.No.CIC/AT/A/2009/000596
Dated, the 24th September, 2009.
Appellant : Shri P. Guha
Respondents : Coal India Limited
Hearing in this second-appeal was held through videoconferencing
on 09.09.2009 from the Commission’s office at New Delhi. Appellant,
who was notified to be present at NIC VC facility at Dhanbad, was
absent. Respondents were present at NIC VC facility at Kolkata,
represented by the Appellate Authority and the CPIO.
2. As stated by the appellant in his second-appeal petition, this
second-appeal is regarding points at Sl.Nos.1, 2, 6 and 9 in appellant’s
RTI-application dated 06.02.2009. These read as follows:-
“1. Copy of updated CR / EER Rules as applicable to CIL
executives, along with all circulars and office Orders issued
in connection with application & implementation of these
rules. (Note: CR Rules are not available on CIL RTI site and
are very very old as available on other subsidiaries sites.)
2. Copy of relevant rules, circulars, office orders, guidelines
specifying procedure for review of CR / EER ratings of
Executives of CIL/M-2 grade Executives.
6. Details & Copy of the decision of competent authority in
reference to letter no.MCL/Hingula Area/EER/2007/104
Dt.10/3/07 of Sh Keshava Gupta GM (MCL) for review of his
EER for the year 2002-2003, which was forwarded by CMD
(MCL) vide his letter no.CMD/MCL/ES/4938 dt.16/03/2007,
to Chairman (CIL).” [sic]
9. Rates of Interest, in different periods from Jan 1990 to till
date, payable on repayment of Car Loan.”
3. During the hearing, respondents stated that, according to their
understanding, appellant’s present request was for disclosure of
information in his query at Sl.No.6 of his application. Information
AT-24092009-02.doc
Page 1 of 2
relating to his queries at Sl.Nos.1 and 2 was provided on 03.03.2009 by
the CPIO and regarding query no.9, information was furnished to him on
12.03.2009. Information in appellant’s query at Sl.No.6 was not
provided as it pertained to a third-party, Shri Keshava Gupta.
4. It is seen that through query at Sl.No.6, appellant had requested
for the review of EER of Shri Keshava Gupta, GM (MCL) for the year
2002-2003. Such matters are quite obviously personal to the third-party
and cannot be disclosed to a petitioner except with the third-party’s
concurrence under Section 7(7) and Section 11(1) of the RTI Act.
5. It is accordingly directed that CPIO initiate third-party
consultation process under Section 11(1), only in respect of item no.6 in
appellant’s RTI-application and, make a fresh determination regarding
whether the information merited disclosure. This may be completed
within four weeks of the receipt of this order.
6. Appeal disposed of with these directions.
7. Copy of this direction be sent to the parties.
( A.N. TIWARI )
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER
AT-24092009-02.doc
Page 2 of 2