Appellant: Respondent has neither informed the total amount of photocopy charges nor the mode and place to deposit it - CIC: This is a serious lacuna; It amounts to obstruction of information under RTI; Respondent cautioned for future

Information sought:

The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 10.03.2023 seeking the following information:

“Name of Work: Supplying, Installation, Testing & Commissioning of Digital Programmable Water Fountain with RGB Lights at Bhairon Marg, Pragati Maidan, Delhi. NIT No.: - 44/SE/C&ND/PWD/2022-23 401/EE(E)/PWD/DHC&ND/Central/202.2-23.

1 Whether the above subjected NIT is drawn to favour M/s KSR Brothers?

2 Kindly provide the CTC (certify true copy) of CPWD work manual, SOP, GCC where it is clearly mentioned that manufactures/OEM condition is mandatory in fountain tender.

3 If not, as per sought in para 2 then what is the personal interest of tender calling authority to put manufactures/OEM condition in subjected NIT to favour the particular contractor i.e. M/s KSR Brothers?

4 Kindly provide the CTC (certify true copy) of tenders invited by your division before this tender and manufactures/OEM condition was mandatory. (only in fountain tender's cases) NIT?

5 What was the reason that color design India make doesn't consider in the above subjected NIT? When in your division as well as in others PWD Division/CPWD/NDMC consider the color design india make.

6 Sir as per the CPWD work manual 2022 chapter 16 para 16.6 page 61 it is clearly mentioned that

7 As per sought in para 6 that as per CPWD work manual 2022 chapter 16 para 16.6 page 61 it is clearly mentioned that "To encourage make in India and promote manufacturing and production of goods and services in India with a view to enhancing income and employment, the Department of industrial policy and promotion, Ministry of commerce and industry, pursuant to Rule 153(iii) of the GFR 2017, have issued orders for procurement through local suppliers. As per the provisions of these orders, purchase preference shall be given to local suppliers in all procurements undertaken by procuring entities in the manner specified to the said orders. Guidelines/orders/notifications related to public procurement policy have also been issued by M/o finance, Deptt. Of Expenditure, M/o electronics and IT, CVC etc. CPWD Directorate has been issuing directions for compliance of the said orders and their inclusion in the tender conditions. The same are uploaded on the CPWD website and are to be followed." Does there is no manufacture in India who manufacture fountain light and other related accessories?

8 Kindly provide the CTC (certify true copy) of price list of all makes consider in the above subjected NIT.

9 Kindly provide the CTC (certify true copy) of TDS (Technical Data Sheet) of all makes consider in the above subjected NIT.

10 Whether the rates/price and technical Data sheet of makes consider in the NIT are equivalent to each other's?

11 Sir what is the reason that "The Fountainer" make consider in only 2 items list of makes i.e. 3.1 (Under fountain light) & 3.5 (CVD)?

12 Whether the rates consider in the NIT are confirmed or verified from the local market or local vendor?”

The CPIO furnished a point-wise reply to the Appellant on 06.04.2023 stating as under:

“1 It is not true to say that NIT is drawn in favour of M/s KSR Brothers. This NIT was prepared by taking three reputed makes of equivalent specification and within 10% price variation. This was open tender floated on Delhi Government website E- Procurement. Delhi.

2 This condition can be had from CPWD works manual under specializes work condition/category.

3 N.A. in view of Point No.2

4 The another tender for fountain work was invited by this division during the year 2022-23. You can obtained required information/copies of this NIT by depositing required fee or can be seen on the website portal e-procurement Delhi.

5 As per CVC guidelines three equivalent makes are taken in this NIT. This office has no any information about the consideration of color designed India make in other PWD Divisions/CPWD/NDMC

6 This office follows the instruction given in GFR 2017 and ministry of finance order for procurement of electrical items. This office procure 100% material on GeM through local supplier/vendors i.e this office follow 100% make in Indian policy/concept as per guideline issued by M/o finance, Department of expenditure, M/o electronics & IT CVC and CPWD Directorate.

7 This office follows the instruction given in GFR 2017 and ministry of finance order for procurement of electrical items. This office procure 100% material on GeM through local supplier/vendors i.e this office follow 100% make in Indian policy/concept as per guideline issued by M/o finance, Department of expenditure, M/o electronics & IT CVC and CPWD Directorate.

8 Price list/quotations can be obtained by depositing required fees as per RIT Rules.

9 Price list/quotations can be obtained by depositing required fees as per RIT Rules.

10 Three make of equivalent price lists & specifications have been taken as per CVC guidelines.

11 Make of items are taken as per item manufactured by manufacturers. The make of items are taken which comes within 10% price variation & specification as per CVC guidelines.

12 Rates are taken/derived on the basis of price list/quotation available in this office and as per prevailing market rates.”

Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 11.05.2023. The FAA order is not on record.

Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.

Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:

The following were present:-

Appellant: Present in person.

Respondent: Shri Permod Kumar Sharma, PIO/AE (E) present in person.

The Appellant, during the hearing, reiterated the contents of his RTI application and instant appeal and submitted that till date complete and correct information has not been provided to him by the Respondent. Upon being queried by the Commission w.r.t deposit of photocopy charges, the Appellant submitted that the Respondent in its response has neither informed the total amount of photocopy charges nor the mode and place to deposit the photocopy charges.

The Respondent while defending their case inter-alia submitted that vide their letter dated 06.04.2023, point-wise reply/information, as per the documents available on record has been provided to the Appellant. The Respondent further submitted that they have not received the first appeal of the Appellant in their office.

Decision:

The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both the parties and perusal of the records, observes that the Appellant is aggrieved that till date complete and correct information has not been provided to him by the Respondent. The Appellant further contended that the Respondent has not informed the amount of photocopy charges which is to be deposited to obtain the information.

This is a serious lacuna on the part of the Respondent in giving incomplete information to the Appellant. Not informing the exact amount of photocopy charges and the process for depositing the same amounts to obstruction of information on the part of the Respondent under the RTI Act. In view of this, the Respondent is directed to be cautious in future and ensure that such lapses do not recur.

The Commission further noted that the first appeal of the Appellant was duly received in the office of the Public Authority, as the same bears the stamp of Superintending Engineer (Project). The Respondent is further directed to be careful and sure while making any submissions before the Commission.

In view of the facts and circumstances, the Respondent is directed to re-examine the RTI application dated 10.03.2023 of the Appellant on point Nos. 2, 3, 4, 8 and 9 and inform the Appellant exact number of pages which is to be given under the RTI Act along with total amount and mode by which the same is to be deposited, within a week from the date of receipt of this order. The Appellant is directed to deposit the payment within one week thereafter. Upon receipt of payment from the Appellant, the Respondent is directed to provide information to the Appellant on point Nos. 2, 3, 4, 8 and 9 of the RTI application, within a week from the date of receipt of payment.

The FAA is directed to ensure compliance of this order.

The appeal is dismissed accordingly.

Vinod Kumar Tiwari

Information Commissioner

Citation: Piyush Sharma v. O/o the Executive Engineer (E), PWD, New Delhi, File No: CIC/PWDDL/A/2023/132711; Date of Decision : 29.10.2024