Central Information Commission
Appeal No.CIC/WB/A/2008/01520-SM dated 07.02.2008
Right to Information Act-2005-Under Section (19)
Dated 01.04.2009
Appellant : Shri V.V. Joshi
Respondent : Headquarters South Western Air Command, Min. of Defence
The Appellant is not present, in spite of notice.
On behalf of the Respondent, Sq. Ldr. S.S. Rathi, is present.
The brief facts of the case are as under.
2. The Appellant, in his application dated 7 February 2008, had requested the CPIO
to provide him with the copies of various documents in respect of some land around the
airfield at Pune. The CPIO replied on 19 March 2008 and denied most of the information
on the ground that the disclosure of such information would be against the national
security and, therefore, was exempt under Section 8(1) (a) of the Right to Information
(RTI) Act. However, in respect of one particular information, he advised the Appellant to
deposit the cost of photocopying of the relevant records. Not content with this reply, he
approached the first Appellate Authority on 31 March 2008. The first Appellate Authority
disposed of the appeal in his order dated 19 May 2008 he rejected the appeal after
endorsing the decision of the CPIO. It is against this order that the Appellant has now
come before the CIC in second appeal.
3. The Appellant was not present in spite of notice. We heard the submissions of
the Respondent. We also carefully considered the contents of the appeal memo and the
original application for information. We note that much of the information sought by the
Appellant would involve the disclosure of sketch, plan and other details of a Defence
Airfield and the CPIO was right in denying the information as the disclosure of the details
of a Defence Airfield could have serious implications from the security point of view.
Some information such as the minutes of the meeting held with the Chief Minister of the
State was not available with the Public Authority at all. The only information which the
Public Authority held and is willing to disclose is a copy of the notification for which the
CIC/WB/A/2008/01520-SM
CPIO had advised the Appellant to deposit the cost. We specifically wanted the
Respondent to clarify why individual applications sent by landowners seeking NOC from
the authorities could not be disclosed. He submitted that each such applicant had given
individual applications containing details about his respective land and the disclosure of
such information to a third party could adversely affect the competitive position of those
landowners and therefore such information was exempt from disclosure under Section
8(1)(d) of the Right to Information (RTI) Act. We generally agree with the arguments of
both the CPIO and the Respondent. The ground on which the information has been
denied seems to be valid and in conformity with the provisions of the RTI Act. There is
little merit in this appeal.
4. The appeal is thus disposed off.
5. Copies of this order be given free of cost to the parties.
Sd/-
(Satyananda Mishra)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against application
and payment of the charges prescribed under the Act to the CPIO of this Commission.
(Vijay Bhalla)
Assistant Registrar
CIC/WB/A/2008/01520-SM
