Appellant: Document on the basis of which the Competition Commission arrived at a conclusion was not provided - PIO: Inspection of records was offered - CIC: Appellant is at liberty to avail inspection of records as earlier offered on a convenient date
15 Jul, 2024
Appellant: Document on the basis of which the Competition Commission arrived at a conclusion in was not provided - PIO: Appellant seeking information pertaining to a quasi-judicial decision for which inspection of records was offered as per the CCI (General) Regulations which was not availed off by him - PIO: In case the appellant is dissatisfied with the outcome of the decision, he can exhaust the remedy available to him to appeal against the decision before the NCLAT - CIC: An appropriate response in accordance with the provisions of the RTI Act; The Appellant is at liberty to avail inspection of records as earlier offered to him on a mutually convenient date and time
Information sought and background of the case:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 03.11.2022 seeking information on following points:-
“1. Kindly provide the copy of the document having mentioned that as per ISO17025:2017, participation in proficiency testing is mandatory from where Hon'ble Competition Commission of India have Concluded in their order.
2. Kindly provide the copy of the document having mentioned the ground/reason on that basis there is difference between the standard ISO-17025:2017 and conclusion of Hon'ble Competition Commission of India in Case 25 of 2020.”
The CPIO and Director (Law), CCI vide letter dated 05.12.2022 replied as under:-
“2. In this regard, your reference is invited to the CCI (General) Regulations, 2009 which provide procedure for inspection and certification of documents. As you are party in Case No. 25 of 2020, you may inspect the case records subject to the provisions of the aforesaid Regulations and obtain certified copies thereof, if so desired.”
Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 19.12.2022. The FAA and Secretary In- Charge vide order dated 20.01.2023 stated as under:-
“5. In view of the above and based on the material available on record, I am of the considered opinion that the Appellant being part of the proceedings to Case No. 25 of 2020 before CCI can apply for inspection of records and obtain certified copies of such documents, as desired, in terms of the provisions contained in Competition Commission of India (General) Regulations, 2009. Accordingly, the Appellant is at liberty to access the requisite information/records as sought for, as per the relevant provisions of Regulation 37 read with Regulation 50 of the Competition Commission of India (General), Regulations, 2009. 6. With the aforesaid observations, no other or further order is required to be passed on the Instant appeal and the same stands disposed of.”
Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal. A written submission has been received from the CPIO and Director (Law), Competition Commission of India vide letter dated 18.03.2024 which ahs been taken on record.
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
Appellant: Heard through audio conference
Respondent:
1. Shri Kapil Dev Singh, CPIO and Director (Law)
2. Shri Anand Vikas Mishra, Jt Director
The Appellant stated that the document on the basis of which the Competition Commission arrived at a conclusion in Case 25 of 2020 was not provided. Shri Kapil Dev Singh referred to his written submission and stated that the Appellant was seeking information pertaining to a quasi judicial decision for which inspection of records was offered as per the CCI (General) Regulations, 2009 which was not availed off by him. He also stated that in case he is dissatisfied with the outcome of the decision, he can exhaust the remedy available to him to appeal against the decision before the NCLAT.
Decision:
Keeping in view the facts of the case and the submissions made by both the parties, the Commission is of the view that an appropriate response in accordance with the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005. The Appellant is at liberty to avail inspection of records as earlier offered to him on a mutually convenient date and time, if he so desires within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order. Shri Kapil Dev Singh, CPIO and Director (Law) is directed submit a compliance report of the above direction to the Commission by 15.05.2024. For redressal of his grievance regarding correctness of the decision of the Competition Commission of India, the Appellant is advised to approach an appropriate forum.
With the above observations, the instant Second Appeal stands disposed off as such.
Heeralal Samariya
Chief Information Commissioner
Citation: Shri Prem Prakash v. Competition Commission of India, CIC/CPCOI/A/2023/105991; Date of Decision: 28.03.2024