Business Standard: New Delhi: Monday, June 10, 2013.
Why was
Petroleum Ministry not inclined to let the then Additional Solicitor General AS
Chandiok to represent it in a case against Essar Steel?
The reasons
for such reservations expressed by the Petroleum Ministry before the Law
Ministry should be made public, the Central Information Commission has ruled.
The
transparency panel allowed disclosure of communication and file notings in
connection with the Petroleum Ministry's request to the Law Ministry to replace
Chadiok from a case against Essar Steel.
The
Commission rejected the contention of the Petroleum Ministry that the letter
from its Secretary to the Secretary Law Ministry was "confidential"
and related to a "sensitive issue", so it should not be disclosed.
"It is a
well settled law that the public authority can claim exemption from disclosure
only as per the section 8 (1) of the RTI Act. In the present appeal before the
Commission, the respondent has not claimed any exemption as per the RTI Act nor
been able to explain how the information if revealed would attract any of the
exemption as per the Act," Information Commissioner Sushma Singh held.
Essar Steel
had approached the Delhi High Court challenging the Petroleum Ministry's move
to reduce the supply of natural gas from the Reliance KG-D6 fields to non-core
sectors. It had maintained that if gas supply was reduced, the company would
face hardships.
While the
court had passed orders on June 3, 2011, the ASG intimated it to the Petroleum
ministry on July 1.
The Petroleum
Ministry had in a letter to the Law Ministry claimed that Chandiok took a stand
against its instructions.
It said that
the ASG's stand was also against the affidavit filed by the Petroleum Ministry
before the High Court.
.JPG)
.JPG)
