1

CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION

Appeal No. CIC/WB/A/2006/00818
Right to Information Act 2005 Section 19

Appellant: Shri Priya Pal Bhante
Respondent: Rajya Sabha Secretariat.

Facts:
Shri Priya Pal Bhante of Chakma Buddhist Temple, Gaya, Bihar made the
following application to the CPIO, Rajya Sabha Secretariat on 22-3-2006:
The undersigned request you under the provisions of the RTI Act
2005, for a printed copy of the 105
th
report of the Rajya Sabha
Committee on petition that contain the matter of the Chakma tribal
population of Arunachal Pradesh and Mizoram State of North East
India including an authentic copy of the Action Taken Report (ATR)
furnished therein along with 105
th
report by the MHA, Government
of India.

In response Shri Deepak Goyal, Director & CPIO Rajya Sabha, in his
letter of 13-4-06 while agreeing to provide a copy of 116 pages of the 105
th

Report of Committee on Petitions, on payment of requisite charges, had stated
that the action taken report could not be disclosed u/s 8 (1) ( c) of the RTI Act,
2005 and in keeping with well established Parliamentary practice, where under
all the documents submitted to a Committee are treated as confidential unless
they are laid on the Table of the House or a report thereon is presented to the
House.

Pleading that he be given a certified copy of the ATR Shri Priya Pal under
the name of Priya Pal Bikkhu made his first appeal to Shri N.C. Joshi, Addl.
Secretary and appellate authority in the Rajya Sabha Secretariat, on which
observations of the appellate authority in his order of June 1, 2006 were as
follows:
The Action Taken Report furnished by the Ministry concerned on
the Committees recommendations/observations is meant for
examination/perusal of the Committee and hence it cannot be
supplied in terms of the provisions of clause ( c) of Section 8 (1) of
the RTI Act having regard to the well established Parliamentary
2
practice hereunder all the documents submitted to a Committee are
treated as confidential unless they are laid on the Table of the
House or a report thereon is presented to the House.

Stating that the CPIO and appellate authority of the Rajya Sabha had kept
an important point undisclosed and unclear to him in the reply on his application,
Shri P.P. Bhante alias Bikkhu made a second appeal before us once more
seeking a certified copy of the ATR furnished by the MHA, Govt of India in
connection with the105
th
Report of the Committee on Petitions, of the Rajya
Sabha.

In his response to our appeal notice sent on 15-1-2007 Shri Deepak Goyal
in his letter of 26-2-2007 has quoted extracts from Rules and Procedures and
Conduct of Business Lok Sabha (March 2004 edition), extracts from the
Speakers directions (March 2004 decision) extract from Parliamentary procedure
by Shri Subhash C. Kashyap, second edition and extract from Rajya Sabha by
Ms. V.S. Ramadevi and P.G. Gujar, first edition, 1996 to establish that evidence
presented, reports made and proceedings of Parliamentary Committees are
treated as confidential unless they are laid on the Table of the House or a report
thereon is presented to the House. It is clarified, in the extract from Parliamentary
procedure cited above, item 53.6 specifically states:
Proceedings of a Select Committee/Joint Committee are to be
treated as confidential and not to be mentioned in the House. [HP
Deb. (II), 1-8-1952 cc. 5022-23, 5027; LS Deb. (II), 19-11-1957,
c.1320]

The appeal was heard on 29-3-2007. Following are present:
Respondent:
Shri N.C. Joshi, Add. Secretary (Appellate Authority)
Shri Deepak Goyal, Director, Rajya Sabha Sectt, CPIO
Appellant Shri P.P. Bhante had been informed of the date of hearing by
our notice of 15-1-2007. He has chosen not to be present.

3
DECISION NOTICE:

Respondents have taken the plea of Section 8 (1) (c) to withhold the
information sought regarding request for the ATR to be given to appellant.
Section 8 (1) (c) reads as follows:
Information, the disclosure of which would cause a breach of
privilege of Parliament or the State Legislature

This is of course qualified by the proviso to Section 8, which reads:
Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the
Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person

We have examined the file. Although the information in this case is the
information available to a Select Committee of Parliament under the extract of
Parliamentary procedure item 53.6 quoted above, proceedings of the Select
Committee or Joint Committee cannot be disclosed even in the House.
Therefore, recourse to this proviso will not hold in this case. The only means
under which information sought by appellant can be disclosed is either: i) that the
Committee decides to place this before the Parliament; (ii) the Committee
submits reports thereon to Parliament-in which case a member can seek further
information on any point-or (iii) the Chairman of the Committee specifically
gives permission for its disclosure.
1
(Pg. 634 extract from the Rajya Sabha by
V.S. Ramadevi and P.G. Gujar Chapter 25, Committees on Petitions). In this
case, therefore, the piece of information sought by appellant has been withheld in
accordance with the law. The appeal is therefore dismissed.

Announced in the hearing. Notice of this decision be given free of cost to
the parties.


(Wajahat Habibullah)
Chief Information Commissioner
29-3-2007

1
Emphasis added
4
Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against
application and payment of the charges prescribed under the Act to the CPIO of
this Commission.



(L.C.Singhi)
Addl. Registrar
29-3-2007