APPEAL BEFORE MR.

SUDEB GUPTA Appellant Authority-cum-Executive Director

UNDER SECTION 19(1) OF RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT 2005

Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Punjab State Office, Plot No. 3A, Sector - 19A, Madhya Marg Chandigarh

BY HAND/SPEED POST 12 APRIL 2013

COMPLAINANT
Surendera M. Bhanot
3758, Sector 22-D, Chandigarh-160022 Mobile: +919-888-810-811 rtifed@gmail.com

RESPONDENTS
1. Mr. Padm Pande, Chief Manager (RS), Versus
Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Punjab State Office, Plot No. 3A, Sector -19A, Madhya Marg, Chandigarh - 160019 Mr. S.K. Jha, APIO-cum-Chief Manager (RS) Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Punjab State Office, Plot No. 3A, Sector -19A, Madhya Marg, Chandigarh - 160019

2.

IN THE MATTER OF

FOR REFUSAL TO ALLOW INSPECTION OF THE RECORD OF CHANDIGARH OFFICE OF THE INDIAN OIL CORPORATION BY MR. PADM PANDEY AND MR. S.K. JHA BOTH CHIEF MANAGERs (RS) POSTED AT INDIAN OIL CORPORATION CHANDIGARH

INDEX
SR PARTICULARS
01 Copy of the letter No. PSO/Retail/ASR of 21 March 2013 of Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Chandigarh Request for Inspection of office record relating to the letter No. PSO/Retail/ASR of 21 March 2013 of Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Chandigarh Letter dated 27 March 2013 of Mr. Parbodh Chander Bali of Amritsar

DATE
21 Mar 2013

ANNEXURE PAGE
Annexure-I

05

02

26 Mar 2013

Copy of this to be supplied by the respondents

--

03

27 Mar 2013

Annexure-II

06

Respectfully showeth,

PRELIMINARY
Indian Oil Corporation Limited Chandigarh sent letter No. PSO/Retail/ASR of 21 March 2013 jointly signed by Mr. Padm Pande Chief Manager (RS) and Mr. S.K. Jha1 Chief Manager (RS) both of Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Chandigarh (IOCL
1

From the Website of the Indian Oil Corporation Limited it has been revealed that you are Central Assistant Public Information Officer (CAPIO) of the Office, and all this drama unfolded in your presence and in front of you. But you stayed mere a spectator and colluded with Mr. Padm Pande in denying me my right under the Right to Information Act 2005.

Page 1 of 7 pages

for short), to the address of Mr. P.C. Bali of Amritsar (copy enclosed), regarding some unsigned complaint made in the name of Mr. P.C. Bali to the Chairman of the Indian Oil Corporation Limited. Mr. Bali was asked to appear before them on 02 April 2013. As it was a strange and abnormal thing happened, Mr. Bali e-mailed me a scanned copy of the above IOCL letter and requested me to look into it. Mr. Bali was busy on 02 April 2013 as such he made up his mind to meet the officers on 26 March 2013. I accompanied Mr. Bali to the office of the Indian Oil Corporation Limited Chandigarh on 26 March 2013 around noon. Our Names were entered into the Entry Register maintained at the Gate of that office. A Gate Pass No. 62 dated 26 March 2013 was issued in the name of Mr. Bali +1 to visit the officers concerned. The meeting was arranged in the office of Mr. Padam Pande where Mr. SK Jha also joined us. After exchanging the preliminaries, Mr. Bali requested the officers to supply him a copy unsigned letter so that he could ascertain the veracity of the purported unsigned letter. Both the officers refused to supply a copy of the queried the letter. They rather, insisted Mr. Bali to confirm, if the letter was indeed written by him or not. Without looking at the impugned letter it was difficult for Mr. Bali to say whether it was written by him or not. On our perseverance, Mr. Pande just rolled on his Computer Prompt and pointed out that the 2-page letter that was there in his computer, for 2-3 seconds and closed it. He refused to give a print out of that to Mr. Bali, and also explained no reason for that except that it is his prerogative to give or not to give the print out to Mr. Bali, as he is in control of the office. He directed to just explain if Mr. Bali has written that unsigned letter or not. This question was quite confusing one to ascertain without having study the copy of the document to say yes or no.

GROUNDS OF APPEAL
Seeing their refusal & reluctance, and seeing the Larger Public Interest, as is apparent from the contents of the above referred IOCL letter No. PSO/Retail/ASR of 21 March 2013 jointly signed by Mr. Padm Pande Chief Manager (RS) and Mr. S.K. Jha Chief Manager (RS) of Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Chandigarh jointly, I requested for an inspection of the records under Section 2(j)(ii) of the Right to Information Act 2005 read with Explanation to Section 4, Section 2(f) & 2(i); and the relevant Right to Information Rules 2012. It was explained to both of them that an information seeker, can walk-in in any office of any Public Authority and can exercise his/her Right to Inspect the office / record under Right to Information Act 2005. The inspection was flatly refused by both of them. On my insistent, they asked me to approach the Central Public Information Officer CPIO of IOCL Chandigarh. It was explained to both of them that the Central Public Information Officer does not come into the scene as Central Public Information Officer has to deal only with the RTI Applications made under Section 6(1) of the Act abid. The request for the inspection of office shall have to be met by the concerned officers/staff where the inspection is desired. They refused. I requested for a piece of paper so that I could deduce and reduce my oral request into a written one. They refused to give me a paper too . On my persistent demand they ultimately relented and gave me a paper. A request to inspect the record was made and given to Mr. Pande in presence of Mr. Jha and he was requested to allow me the access to the record relating to the letter sent to Mr. Bali, including the data material held in any electronic form lying in the hard-disk of his computer or the

Page 2 of 7 pages

server of the Indian Oil Corporation Limited Chandigarh. They almost jumped out of their seats on hearing this. How can you check our Computers, pat came the question. I explained that I am an empowered citizen and the law enables me to do this. No No replied Mr. Pande. You cannot do this. We have to check our legal department regarding this. I requested them to call the concerned person from the legal Department and we can discuss the matter. No, we will do on our own said Mr. Pande, seconded by Mr. Jha. I asked that a photocopy of my REQUEST FOR INSPECTION may please be provided to me. They flatly refused. When I asked them to provide me with a Acknowledgement Receipt of my REQUEST FOR INSPECTION, they again declined with a malice. ALL OUR ORAL PLEAS, APPEALS, REQUESTS, PETITIONS, ENTREATIES, PRAYERS, SUPPLICATIONS, IMPLORATIONS AND DEMANDS FELL FOR CAUSALITY AT THE HANDS OF THESE ADAMANT OFFICERS. It seems that, even after the passage of 7-years of the Right to Information Act 2005 in being, our officers have not learned the spirit of the Right to Information Act 2005, rather officers have mastered the technique of evading and avoiding parting with the bona-fide requests for information. Thus these officers have obstructed in exercising my lawful fundamental right to information through Inspection. They have prevented me from making request and giving its receipt. They also refused to offer me the record for Inspection. Astoundingly, Mr. Pande even refused to sign and return the Gate Pass after endorsing it, We were obliged to return this Gate Pass to the Security/Time office at the Gate. On our persistence, he agreed to return the Gate Pass, but not before getting a Xerox copy of it, for the reasons best known to him only. If it is the practice to keep the photocopies of the Gate Pass in record by the visited officer, it is alright. But if not so, they had some malafide in their mind and they need to explain a lot about it.

PRAYER
It is humbly prayed that necessary inquiry in the matter may please be initiated against Mr. Padm Pande Chief Manager (RS) and Mr. S.K. Jha Chief Manager (RS) of Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Chandigarh, under: Section 18(1)(a) Unable to submit my request for inspection of records. Section 18(1)(b) Refused access to information requested under the Right to Information Act 2005. Section 18(1)(c) Not given response to a request for information or access to information. Section 18(1)(f) Any other matter The officers are not aware of the many provisions of the Right to Information Act 2005 and as such it appears that RTI regime in IOCL Chandigarh is very feeble, fragile and crumbly, and it is beyond the capability of an ordinary citizen to deal with the Officers of Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Chandigarh, tto get the access of information.

Page 3 of 7 pages

RELIEF SOUGHT
It is humbly prayed that: 1. UNDER SECTION 2(j)(ii) OF THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT 2005 That the inspection may please be arranged immediately under Section 2(j)(ii) of the Right to Information Act 2005 read with Explanation to Section 4, Section 2(f) & 2(i); and the relevant Right to Information Rules 2012. 2. UNDER DEPARTMENTAL RULES AND REGULATION The officers may please be proceeded against as per departmental rules and regulation for violating the law, dereliction of duty and misconduct. This appeal may please be considered as a complaint against the officers. I may please be involved in the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the officers. 3. UNDER SECTION 19(8)(a)(i) The officers may please be directed to allow us inspection of the records of the Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Chandigarh. 4. UNDER SECTION 19(8)(a)(v) read with Section 25(5) order Enhancing the provision of training on the Right to Information for its officers. 5. UNDER SECTION 19(8)(b) require the Public Authority to compensate the complainant with Rs. 10000.00 for loss or other detriments suffered. 6. UNDER SECTION 19(8)(c) read with Section 20(1) and 20(2) impose any penalty provided under the Act. 7. ANY OTHER RELIEF AS THE HONBLE COMMISSION MAY DEEM FIT.

PLACE: Chandigarh DATED: 11 April 2013

Surendera M. Bhanot Appellant

A copy is also sent to the following High Echelon in the Indian Oil Corporation Limited for information please: 1. Chairman, Corporate Office, Indian Oil Corporation Limited, 3079/3, Sadiq Nagar, J.B. Tito Marg, New Delhi 110049 and at Registered Office, Indian Oil Corporation Limited, G-9, Ali Yavar Jang Marg, Bandra (East), Mumbai 400051. 2. Mr. Padm Pande, Chief Manager (RS), Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Punjab State Office, Plot No. 3A, Sector -19A, Madhya Marg, Chandigarh. 3. Mr. S.K. Jha, Chief Manager (RS) Indian Oil Corporation Limited, , Punjab State Office, Plot No. 3A, Sector -19A, Madhya Marg, Chandigarh From the Website of the Indian Oil Corporation Limited it has been revealed that you are CAPIO of the Office, and all this drama unfolded in your presence and in front of you. But you stayed mere a spectator and colluded with Mr. Padm Pande in denying me my right under the Right to Information Act 2005. A copy is also sent to the following for information and appropriate action please: 1. Under Secretary (RTI), Department The officer of the IOCL, Chandigarh lack the of personnel & Training (DoPT), New basic knowledge of the Right to Information Act 2005 and law related to it, seven years after its Delhi 2. Ministry of Petroleum and Natural being in force. They need rigorous training in this regard. Gas, New Delhi 3. RTIFED, RTI Activists Federation Chandigarh For Information and appropriate action
please

4. RAIS - Rights Awareness International Society, Amritsar For Information and

appropriate action please

Page 4 of 7 pages

PLACE: Chandigarh DATED: 11 April 2013

Surendera M. Bhanot Appellant

Page 5 of 7 pages

ANNEXURE-I

ATTESTED TO BE TRUE COPY Surendera M. Bhanot

Page 6 of 7 pages

ANNEXURE-II
Date: 27 March 2013 From

Parbodh Chander Bali,

16-Shiv Nagar, Batala Road, Amritsar-143001 Mobile: +919417010035, Email: pcbali@rediffmail.com To Mr. Padm Pande & Mr. S.K. Jha, Chief Managers, (RS), Marketing Divisions, Punjab State Office, Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Indian Oil Bhawan, Plot No. 3-A, Madhya Marg, Sector-19 A, CHANDIGARH-(UT) REF: Your letter No. PSO/Retail/ASR dated 21/03/2013. Sirs, I am in receipt of your above referred letter. Please supply me the copy of the said Unsigned Letter which your office has received and which might have remained unsigned due to an overlook. Without inspecting the copy of the said Unsigned Letter and copy of covering envelop of said Unsigned Letter bearing stamps of the post office, I will not be able to confirm any thing in this matter. This has also reference of my visit along with Mr. S M Bhanot, Coordinator, RTIFED Punjab; to your office on 26/03/2013 vide your office security Entry/Gate pas no.62 dated 26 March 2013. My personal request to you, had been turned down by you, to provide me a print out of the referred unsigned letter, while you confirmed that the scan of said Unsigned Letter was well available in your computers hard disk. The reason for this refusal is best known to you but sure it is unethical and non procedural to beforehand provide the copy of a document and then to seek the confirmation for it authentication as a fair and accepted legal conventions in Democratic India. It is correct that I do write a number of letters and complaints to Indian Oil Corporation Limited regarding various irregularities existing in the affairs of Indian Oil Corporation Limited and this is definitely a legal Right of citizenry of India. As such I might have written this said Unsigned Letter as received by you as correct and by overlook could have not signed on that. So unless I receive the photocopy attested as true copy, from your office, I am unable to say Yes or No as well to reply or comment to your any/all queries/questions/informations/replies sought from me in your above referred letter. As now I have already visited you on 26/03/2012 and we had discussed the matter in detail as desired, the meeting as sought by you for 02/04/2013 at 14.30 in your office vide above referred letter, that may please be considered had been made effective and hence on the said date i.e. 2/4/13, and even further, I will not be in position to attend your office until and unless I receive the Attested True Copy of said Unsigned Letter. Till then, please consider the said Unsigned Letter as good as fully effective and obligatory. I also smell some rat in the matter as unfolded in your letter and it seems to be a matter of Larger Public Interest. I also smell that the scandal of this magnitude cannot happen without the involvement of officials/Officers of your office. This matter requires further investigation and cannot be brushed under the carpet, only owing to the reason that the latter is unsigned. I am also witness to the Mr. Bhanots request for the inspection of the records of your good office under Right to Information Act 2005 and the spectacle and manifestation of series of refusals by you both that unwrapped there. This is a clear case of violation of fundamental rights of a senior citizen. Regards. Yours in Human Rights Activism.

Parbodh Chander Bali Cc: 1. The Chairman, Corporate Office, Indian Oil Corporation Limited, 3079/3, Sadiq Nagar, J.B. Tito Marg, New Delhi 110049 and Chairman, Registered Office, Indian Oil Corporation Limited, G-9, Ali Yavar Jang Marg, Bandra (East), Mumbai 400051 Vigilance Deptt., Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., Scope Complex, Core-2, 7 Institutional Area, Lodhi Road, New Delhi -110003

2.

ATTESTED TO BE TRUE COPY Surendera M. Bhanot

Page 7 of 7 pages