O R D E R

1. The appellant filed an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO)O/o. The Accountant General (Economic and Revenue Sector Audit), Anna Salai, Chennai.The appellant seeking informationis as under:-

1(a) Certified copies of the AG audit done in Puducherry Power Corporation Limited (PPCL) subsequent to the AG audit report dated 28.09.2017 to till the date of your reply (Slip, Report, report by AG audit, reply by PPCE of any other relevant documents) may be furnished.

1(b) Certified copies of the replies submitted by PPCL for the above AG audit's inspection report (For each and every query raised by the AG audit) may be furnished.

2(a) Certified copies of the Thematic Audit Report No. DO Lr. No.

AG(E&RSA)/CAP XXIV/SOF/2Q18-19 dated 03.10.2018 may be furnished.

2(b) Certified copies of the replies submitted for the above Thematic Audit Report dated 03.10.2018 (For each and every query) may be furnished.

2. The CPIO vide letter dated 09-01-2019had denied the information as sought at point no. 2(a)&(b)under section 8(1)(c) of the RTI Act, 2005 and given reply at point nos. 1(a&b) as sought in the RTI application.Being dissatisfied with the same, the appellant has filed first appeal dated 18-01-2019 and requested that the information should be provided to him. The FAA vide order dated 18-02-2019upheld CPIOs reply and disposed the appeal. Hehas filed a second appeal before the Commission on the ground that information sought has not been provided to himand requested to direct the respondent to provide complete and correct information.

Hearing:

3. The appellant attended the hearing through audio-call. The respondent, Shri Rajendra, CPIO/ Deputy Accountant General along with Shri Asraf, Sr.

Deputy Accountant General attended the hearing through audio-call.

4. The respondent submitted their written submissions dated 27.12.2021and the same has been taken on record.

5. The appellant reiterated the contents of his RTI Application and submitted that the desired information has not been provided to him by the respondent on his RTI application dated 29.12.2018. He further submitted that the information sought at point no. 2 (a & b) of RTI Application has not been provided. That the information sought at point no. 2 (a) of RTI Application has wrongly been denied under section 8 (1) (c) of RTI Act, 2005. That in support of his submission, he has relied on full bench judgment passed by the Commission in file no. CIC/AT/A/2007/00274, CIC/AT/A/2008/00726 & CIC/AT/A/2009/000732 titled as “Shri Manohar Parrikar& Ors. Vs. Accountant General, Goa & Ors.” decided on 10.06.2010.

6. Shri Asraf submitted that vide their letter dated 09.01.2019, they have informed the appellant that the information sought at point no. 2 (a) of RTI Application has been denied under section 8 (1) (c) of RTI Act, 2005 being the information, the disclosure ofwhich would cause a breach of privilege of Parliament or the State Legislature. He orally submitted that the appellant has sought such information at the preliminary stage and the reports was under progress at the time of filing of the RTI Application, therefore the same could not be provided. That the relevant information as sought at point no. 2 (a) has now been provided to the appellant vide letter dated 27.12.2021.

Decision:

7. The Commission, after hearing the submissions of both the parties and after perusal of records, observes that the appellant has sought information related to the AG audit done in Puducherry Power Corporation Limited (PPCL) and other queries related thereto. That the appellant is aggrieved with the reply provided w.r.t point no. 2 (a & b) of his RTI Application.That during the course of hearing, the appellant has relied on full bench judgment of the Commission titled as “Shri ManoharParrikar& Ors. Vs. Accountant General, Goa & Ors.” That the Commission has gone through the contents of the referred case properly and found that t