2019 (6) TMI 1309 - Commission - Indian Laws

Violation of Human Rights - Corruption - alleged irregularities committed in allotting LPG Distributorship by officers of Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. at Kishangarh Renwal, Tehsil Sambhar, Jaipur - HELD THAT - Commission observes that the reliance placed by CPIO on the earlier decisions of the coordinate benches to substantiate the view that CBI is only obliged to provide information relating to allegation of corruption against its own employees does not hold good. Appellant s contention in the Second Appeal that the subject matter concerns allegations of corruption, Commission does not find any substantive material on record in support of his claim. Moreover, Appellant has also not availed the opportunity of hearing to plead his case and mere claim of corruption or human rights violation is not adequate to attract the proviso to Section 24(1) of RTI Act. Appeal disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
- Information sought regarding action taken on a complaint
- CPIO's failure to provide desired information
- Applicability of RTI Act to CBI
- Interpretation of proviso to Section 24(1) of RTI Act
- Commission's decision on the appeal

Information sought regarding action taken on a complaint:
The Appellant sought details of action taken on a complaint regarding alleged irregularities in allotting LPG Distributorship by IOCL officers. The CPIO did not provide the desired information, leading to the Second Appeal.

CPIO's failure to provide desired information:
During the hearing, the CPIO stated that CBI is placed at Sl. No.23 of the Second Schedule to the RTI Act 2005 and is not obligated to provide information except in cases of specific corruption or human rights violation allegations. The CPIO referred to previous decisions and submissions, highlighting that CBI is only obliged to provide information related to corruption allegations against its employees.

Applicability of RTI Act to CBI:
The Commission observed that the CPIO's reliance on past decisions to support the view that CBI is only required to provide information on corruption allegations against its employees was not valid. Referring to a judgment of the Delhi High Court, the Commission clarified that if information sought pertains to corruption or human rights violation, it is exempt from the exclusion clause, regardless of the organization involved.

Interpretation of proviso to Section 24(1) of RTI Act:
The Commission emphasized that the proviso to Section 24(1) of the RTI Act applies to all information related to corruption and human rights violations, irrespective of the organization or individual involved. The Commission advised the Director of CBI to sensitize CPIOs about the scope and ambit of the RTI Act to prevent future violations.

Commission's decision on the appeal:
The Commission found no substantive evidence supporting the Appellant's claim of corruption allegations. Without concrete material or an opportunity for the Appellant to present his case, the mere claim of corruption or human rights violation was deemed insufficient to trigger the proviso to Section 24(1) of the RTI Act. The appeal was disposed of with observations and an advisory to the Director of CBI.