Air conditioning facility in relation to some Rent Agreement between BIFR and STC denied u/s 8(1)(d) - CIC: agreement between BIFR and STC not exempt u/s 8(1)(d) - it has not explained how disclosure would affect the competitive position of the respondent
18 Aug, 2013ORDER
1. The appellant filed an RTI application dated 27.6.2011 addressed to CPIO, State Trading Corporation of India seeking information on 10 points mainly regarding the issue of air conditioning facility in relation to some Rent Agreement between Board for Industrial & Financial Reconstruction and State Trading Corporation as stated in the application.
2. The CPIO, STC furnished a point wise reply to the appellant vide reply dated 27.7.2011 wherein some of the information was provided. Nor satisfied with the reply, the appellant filed first appeal dated 4.8.2011.
3. The first appellate authority vide his order dated 2.9.2011 held: “Having considered the matter and taking into cognizance of the statement of the appellant that the RTI application was submitted by him in his personal capacity (only address is of BIFR) and not on behalf of BIFR, it is observed that the information sought by the applicant being of commercial confidence between STC and BIFR, dissemination of the same is barred under section 8(1)(d) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information including commercial confidence, trade secrets or intellectual property, the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of a third party, unless the competent authority is satisfied that larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information including commercial confidence, trade secrets or intellectual property, the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of a third party, unless the competent authority is satisfied that larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information including commercial confidence, trade secrets or intellectual property, the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of a third party, unless the competent authority is satisfied that larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; of the RTI Act, 2005 and hence cannot be provided to the applicant.”
4. The appellant submits through his written submissions that “the appellant being a citizen of India and beneficiary of the service provided by the respondent office have every right under this Act to get information as defined under this Act. Therefore, denial of information to the Appellant on the ground that the information sought is on “personal capacity” with malafide intentions is malicious, bad in the eyes of law and violates the provision of section 3 of the RTI Act, 2005.” The appellant further submits that giving status of “commercial confidence” under section 8(1)(d) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information including commercial confidence, trade secrets or intellectual property, the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of a third party, unless the competent authority is satisfied that larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information including commercial confidence, trade secrets or intellectual property, the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of a third party, unless the competent authority is satisfied that larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information including commercial confidence, trade secrets or intellectual property, the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of a third party, unless the competent authority is satisfied that larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; to the queries of the appellant is prejudicial and contrary to provisions of the Act
Decision:
The Commission is deciding this appeal as per section 3 of the RTI Act, 2005 which gives this right to every citizen. The information sought mainly pertains to the agreement between BIFR and STC seeking to know the rent amount etc. The Commission is of the view that such information pertaining to agreement between two public authorities cannot be exempted under section 8(1)(d) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information including commercial confidence, trade secrets or intellectual property, the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of a third party, unless the competent authority is satisfied that larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information including commercial confidence, trade secrets or intellectual property, the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of a third party, unless the competent authority is satisfied that larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information including commercial confidence, trade secrets or intellectual property, the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of a third party, unless the competent authority is satisfied that larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; of the RTI Act. Furthermore, it has not been established or explained how disclosure of such information would affect the competitive position of the respondent. In view of the above, the respondent is hereby directed to furnish complete information at point no. 1,6, 8 & 9 of the RTI application within two weeks from the receipt of this order. The appeal is disposed off accordingly.
Sushma Singh
Information Commissioner
Citation: Mr. George Joseph v. State Trading Corporation in Case No. CIC/SS/A/12/002352