TMI Blog2007 (8) TMI 730X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ltants, the following four consultants filed their tender and their names are as under: (1) Meinhardt (Singapore) Pvt. Ltd. (2) GKW Consultant. (3) Tahal Consulting Engineers Ltd. (4) Burchill Partners Pvt. Ltd. 4. According to the Urban Development Department, the aforesaid four consultants were found eligible but on technical appraisal held on 5.10.2005, Meinhardt (Singapore) Pvt. Ltd. Singapore secured maximum marks and as such, work order was issued to it on 22.6.2006. 5. In the tender notice Clause 3.1.1, 3.1.2 and 3.1.3 were the conditions of eligibility for submission of tender. In the supplementary affidavit filed by the respondent Clause 3.1.1. 3.1.2 and 3.1.3 have been quoted, which reads as under: 3.1.1 Following documents must be furnished in proof of eligibility: (i) Firm's experience; (ii) Firm's turnover for the last 3 years and a certified copy of the audit report in support of the details. (iii) List of equipment and the details of the office and key persons employed by the firm. (iv) Works in hand. 3.1.2 The experience certificate from clients in support of having completed project management detailed project report, pre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed that the desired information as demanded by the respondent-applicant and denied by the appellant is wrong as the said information is not covered under the provision of Section 8(1)(d) of the Act and directed the Public Information Officer of the Department to make the said information available to the respondent-applicant. The appellant-State thereafter, moved this Court challenging the said order passed by the Information Commissioner in WPC No. 1662/07. Learned Single Judge held that information sought for by respondent-application does not come within the exception provided under Section 8(1)(d) of the said Act. Accordingly, the writ application was dismissed. 9. Respondents case is that he made a request for furnishing the following information relating to the said tender: (1) Certified copies submitted by various bidders on the basis of which they were declared qualified for further evaluation by the Tender Committee. (2) In the Tender for sewerage, the Urban Development Department, Government has changed its earlier stand of tender i.e. quality and cost based selection to quality based selection. The note sheet with regard to this change and its approval from the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t and cannot be claimed to be exempted under Section 8(1)(d) of the Act. Learned Counsel submitted that the said successful bidder M/s Meinhardt Private Limited has submitted experience certificate which is false and fabricated document. Learned Counsel drawn bur attention to Annexure-G v/hich is a proceeding dated 9.3.2006 of the Jharkhand State Assembly to show that a discussion was held in respect of appointment of Consultancy regarding construction of drainage and sewerage in the area of Ranchi City. In the said discussion so many questions were asked and allegations were made regarding work of sewerage and drainage system in the Ranchi City. Learned Counsel further submitted that information sought for by respondent No. 1 is with regard to their certificate of eligibility to participate in the tender which has not been exempted under Section 8(1)(d) of the Act. 13. M/s Meinhardt (Singapore) Pvt. Limited, who is a successful bidder has filed as intervention petition and also a counter affidavit supporting the contention of the appellant-State of Jharkhand. 14. Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the intervener, firstly submitted that in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion that has bearing to the subsistence of life that would functionalize the right to life and livelihood. There is a worldwide trend in democratic countries to have a legislation for assuring to the citizens, the right of access to information of the public authorities as part of the efforts to promote openness, transparency and accountability in the administration and to ensure greater participation of the public in decision-making. 20. Considering the suggestions given by Parliamentary Standing Committee, Home Affairs called for report of Pranab Nath Mukherjee Committee and also 179th Law Commission report and the constitutional guarantee vis-a-vis Supreme Court observations the Parliament enacted the right to Information Act, 2005. 21. From reading of the Preamble and the object of the Act, it is manifestly clear that the scope of freedom of information has been enhanced with the object and purpose to give right to information to its citizens so that there exists transparency in Government dealings. 22. Section 2 of the Act defines various authorities. Section 3 provides that all citizens shall have the right to information subject to the provisions of the Act. Sectio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ication. 23. From bare reading of Section 6 of the Act, it is abundantly clear that any person who desires to obtain information under the Act shall have to make a request in writing to the authority prescribed under the Act. It is not necessary that a person seeking information is a citizen of the country or has a direct interest in the matter. As a matter of fact, the provision of Section 6 confers right to information to any person for the obvious reason that right to information flows from the right to expression. At this juncture, we would like to refer a ratio decided by the supreme Court in the case of The State of Uttar Pradesh v. Raj Narain and Ors. AIR 1975 Supreme Court S65. In that case, the Supreme Court discussed about the power of the Court to direct production of document and under what circumstances, a privilege can be claimed as contained under contemplated under Section 123 and 162 of the Evidence Act. While discussing the issue, their Lordships held that the people of this country have a right to know every public act, every thing that is done in a public way by their public functionaries. They are entitled to know the particulars of every public transaction ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... formation, has no leg to stand and the same is rejected. 25. Section 7 lays down the procedure for disposal of request. According to this Section, the appropriate authority on receipt of the request shall either provide the information or reject the request for any of the reasons specified in Sections 8 and 9 of the Act. Sections 8 and 9 are relevant Sections for the instant case, which read as under: Section 8 Exemption from disclosure of information.(1)b Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, (a) information, disclosure of which would prejudicially affect the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security, strategic, scientific or economic interests of the State, relation with foreign State or lead to incitement of an offence; (b) information which has been expressly forbidden to be published by any Court of law or tribunal or the disclosure of which may constitute contempt of Court; (c) information, the disclosure of which would cause a breach of privilege or Parliament or the State Legislature; (d) information including commercial confidence, trade secrets or intellectual property, the disclosure of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ction 8, a Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, may reject a request for information where such a request for providing access would involve in infringement or copyright subsisting in a person other than the State. 26. Section 8(1)(d) is relevant so far instant case is concerned which, inter alia, provides that the authority may refuse to give information relating to commercial confidence, trade secret or intellectual property, 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. The question, therefore, that falls for consideration is as to whether disclosure of various documents submitted by the bidders is a trade secret or commercial confidence or intellectual property. Prima facie, we are of the view that once a decision is taken in the matter of grant of tender, there is no justification to keep it secret. People have a right to know the basis on which the decision has been taken. If tenders are invited by the public authority and on the basis of tender documents, the eligibility of a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on or record on a request made under this Act, which relates to or has been supplied by a third party and has been treated as confidential by that third party of the request giving him opportunity to make submission as to whether such document should be disclosed or not. 29. In the instant case, admittedly no notice was given by the State Information Officer but the order was passed in favour of the third party inasmuch as the State Information Officer refused to disclose the document on the ground that the same is exempted under Section 8(1)(d) of the Act. Hence, there is no violation of principles of natural justice. Be that as it may, this Court has entertained the intervention application and gave full opportunity of hearing to the Intervener on the question whether such document comes within the purview of Section 8(1)(d) of the Act. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the question of violation of principles of natural justice does not arise. 30. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and in the light of the law discussed hereinabove, the order passed by the Chief Information Commissioner and the learned Single Judge warrant no interference by this C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
