M.Y. Eqbal, J.

1. This appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent is directed against the judgment and order dated 9.4.2007 passed in W.P.(C) No. 1662 of 2007, whereby learned Single Judge dismissed the writ application filed by petitioner /appellant-State of Jharkhand and held that the order passed by the Information Commissioner, Jharkhand is legal, valid and justified.

2. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass:

The Urban Development Department, Govt. of Jharkhand advertised invitation of proposals for Project Management Consultancy Service including detailed engineering design and construction supervision for sewerage and drainage system for the capital city of Ranchi. Pursuant to the said tender notice the following six consultants purchased tender papers. They were namely

(1) Meinhardt (Singapore) Pvt. Ltd.

(2) STUP Consultants (P) Ltd.

(3) GKW Consultant,

(4) Tahal Consulting Engineers Ltd.,

(5) Burchill Partners Pvt. Ltd.

(6) RITES LTD.

3. Out of six consultants, 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) Firms experience;

(ii) Firms 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, preparation of tender documents, bid process management, construction supervision for commissioning of sewerage and drainage for a development project. Scope of services rendered by the firm be clearly indicated in the certificate from the client.

3.1.3 The minimum essential requirement in respect of eligibility has been indicated below. Proposal deficient in any of these requirement will not be considered for further evaluation.

6. In the tender for sewerage, the Urban Development Department, Government of Jharkhand has changed its earlier stand of tender i.e. quality and cost based selection to quality based selection.

7. After tender process was completed and work order was issued the respondent No. 1 submitted a letter of request to Deputy Secretary, Urban Development Department, Govt. of Jharkhand with requisite fee seeking information and disclosure of copies submitted by various bidders as per Clause 3.1.1, 3.1.2 and 3.1.3 of tender notice on the basis of which they were declared qualified for further evaluation by the Tender Committee. Respondent also requested disclosure of note sheets with regard to the change of the condition of the tender and its approval from the competent authority. Petitioner/Appellant No. 2 Deputy Secretary, Urban Development Department intimated the respondent that the information desired by him in Column No. 1 was being made available but the information desired in Column No. 2 cannot be supplied as because the same is exempted from disclosure of information under the provision of Section 8(1)(d) of Right to Information Act, 2005. Being aggrieved by the said intimation, respondent-applicant preferred appeal being Appeal No. 2 of 2006 before the Principal Secretary, Urban Development Department, Govt. of Jharkhand being the First Appellate Authority.

8. The appellate Authority vide order dated 20.12.2006 directed In