Information regarding purchase of Needle Holder Assembly from Covic Asia, Singapore was denied u/s 8(1)(d) stating that the disclosure would harm the competitive position of third party - PIO: This technology is new in India - CIC: Denial upheld
28 Oct, 2015F.No. CIC/YA/A/2014/001513
The appellant filed an RTI application on 16.11.2013, seeking 14 points information regarding purchase of Needle Holder Assembly from Covic Asia, Singapore. CPIO in his reply denied providing information u/s 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; stating that the information sought pertains to commercial confidence of the third party, disclosure of which would harm their competitive position. The FAA in his order upheld the CPIO’s decision.
The respondent re-iterated the earlier stand that information cannot be disclosed u/s 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; . On query by the Commission as to how disclosure of information sought by the appellant affect their competitive position, CPIO informed that these needle holders are used by doctors to draw body fluid samples from patients. He stated that a needle assembly comprises of a hub and a needle connected to the hub, whereby the needle comprises a non-patient end and an intravenous end. He stated that this needle assembly is used at a particular angle in order to reduce the pain a patient suffers while drawing body fluids. He stated that this technology is new in India and they are importing this technology from Singapore. He further stated that this service is being provided only to premium customers as on date and it has received mass acceptance. He stated that these details cannot be disclosed to their competitors. He stated that the information sought by the appellant is detailed and the fact that the appellant may be seeking this information on behalf of the competitors cannot be ruled out.
F.No.CIC/YA/A/2014/001481
The appellant filed an RTI application on 04.12.2013, seeking information on 9 points regarding decisions taken on iron ore business till date by the HLL Life Care Ltd., tender details, comparative statements, details of quantity exported to each customer with unit cost, etc. CPIO provided a point-wise reply. The FAA upheld the CPIO’s decision. The respondent stated that there were no tenders issued as it was a single-point purchase. He further stated that the information which could have been provided has already been provided, as per available record.
Interim Decision: 04.08.2015
After hearing the respondents and on perusal of record, the Commission, in the abovementioned files, directs the CPIO to furnish written submissions as to how information cannot be provided u/s 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; , latest by 12th August, 2015, after which the Commission shall take a decision in these matters.
Decision: 13.08.2015
Written Submissions dt. 07.08.2015 have been received from the CPIO.
In F.No. CIC/YA/A/2014/001513, the CPIO has stated the respondent authority has been putting considerable efforts for Blood Bag needle Vendors, as the same are not manufactured in India. He has stated since the needle assembly operation is highly manual, the chances of sensitive needle tip getting damaged is very high. Hence, the acceptance of the blood bag was limited in quality conscious corporate blood banks and in export markets. To overcome the same, research was done all over the world to find out a suitable automatic assembled blood bag needle with Re-capable Hard Needle Cover, which will prevent damage due to external stresses and M/s Covic Asia, a Singapore based supplier was identified, as there is no capable needle holder assemble manufacturer in India. He has stated that after testing and qualifying the samples, the same has been introduced in their production line, to meet customer expectations. He further apprised that based on customer feedback, the supplier has modified the design to customise to their requirements. He has further stated that there were no tenders floated for the contract, it was only based on the requirements of premium customers. HE stated that the information has not been withheld with any malafide intention, but in order to protect their business interest and commercial confidence of the third party, M/s Covic Asia, in the instant case. He urged that the information sought by the appellant is quite detailed and the fact that the appellant may be seeking this information on behalf of the competitors cannot be ruled out. The Commission, in the instant case, concurs with the explanation provided by the respondent authority, that the information sought by the appellant cannot be provided u/s 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; .
In F.No.CIC/YA/A/2014/001481, the CPIO has stated that part information has been provided to the appellant except on matters involving commercial confidence as such price details, etc., as the same would affect the competitive position of the third party. He stated that the company had not floated any tenders for the purchase of iron ore; but identified and purchased the materials on proprietary basis. The Commission finds that the information that could have been provided to the appellant, has been provided to him. Moreover, the appellant has not appeared before the Commission during the hearing nor filed any written submissions in this regard. No further action is required in these matters. The appeals are disposed of accordingly.
(Yashovardhan Azad)
Information Commissioner
Citation: Shri Satheesh Babu v. Hill Lifecare Ltd. in F.No.CIC/YA/A/2014/001513, F.No.CIC/YA/A/2014/001481