Business
Standard: New Delhi: Thursday, 22 January 2015.
In a surprise
argument, the Coal Ministry has said information related to minutes of
screening committee meetings on coal-block allocation cannot be made public as
it will impede the CBI probe, a plea allowed by the Central Information
Commission (CIC) even though the record itself is available on the ministry's
website.
An RTI
applicant, Meenu, had approached the ministry seeking information regarding the
minutes of Screening Committee meetings on coal-block allocations.
The ministry
had replied that the CBI has registered a preliminary enquiry regarding alleged
irregularities in the allocation of coal blocks and refused information citing
Section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act.
The said
section allows a public authority to withhold such information as may impede
the process of investigation, apprehension and prosecution of an accused.
However, the
minutes of screening committee meetings on coal-block allocations are available
on the website of the Coal Ministry.
Information
Commissioner Yashovardhan Azad, an ex-IPS officer, ruled in favour of Coal
Ministry in the matter, saying, "The respondent stated that the files
concerned have been seized by CBI for enquiry into the allocation of coal
blocks and the same is pending, which is why information to the appellant
cannot be provided.
"After
hearing the respondents and on perusal of records, the commission accepts the
plea of CPIO (Central Public Information Officer)/FAA (First Appellate
Authority)."
Recently,
Justice Vibhu Bakhru of Delhi High Court had rejected a similar order by CIC
allowing a public authority to withhold information under Section 8(1)(h) of
the RTI Act without giving justification.
Justice
Bakhru had said that "merely citing that the information is exempted under
Section 8(1)(h) would not absolve the public authority from discharging its
onus..."
In a stern
order, he had said, "... It is apparent from a bare perusal of the CIC's
order that it does not indicate the reasons that persuaded (it) to uphold the
view of the Public Authority that the disclosure of information sought by the
petitioner would impede the prosecution of the petitioner.
"Neither
the FAA nor the CIC has questioned the Public Authority as to how the
disclosure of information would impede the prosecution," he had said.