|
NEW
DELHI: The Information and Broadcasting Ministry has been
asked by the Central Information Commission to provide details
of the shareholding by Kalanithi Maran in the direct-to-home
(DTH) platform, Sun Direct.
The
Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) had earlier registered
a case against Kalanidhi Maran, his younger brother and former
Telecom Minister Dayanidhi Maran regarding Aircel-Maxis deal
with linkage to investment in Sun Direct.
The CIC overruled the objection of the I&B ministry and
Sun Direct that the information sought was commercial in nature
and exempted from disclosure under the Right To Information
(RTI) Act. The Ministry has to give the information by 25
February.
The
DTH platform’s counsel sought to plead that any information
regarding shareholding pattern is in the nature of commercial
confidence-protected under section 8 (1) (d) of the RTI Act
and disclosure of the same will harm the commercial interest
of the third party.’
Earlier, the Ministry’s Public Information Officer K
S Rejimon had refused to provide the information saying the
company had not given consent. Vinod K Jose, a resident of
Jhandewalan, had sought information on the shareholding pattern
in Sun Direct and percentage shares held by Maran.
Information commissioner Shailesh Gandhi said the information
sought cannot be treated as confidential as it is accessible
to public through Registrar of Companies website by making
a payment. "This Bench is of the view that disclosure
of merely the shareholding pattern of Sun Direct TV cannot
put it at a disadvantage from its competitors," he said.
CIC
also observed that the information related to mere matter of
business and pertaining to, or engaged in, commerce can be treated
as commercial. The details of the shareholding pattern are not
in the nature of commercial confidence. In any case. The Commission
felt that it had not been apprised how disclosure of such information
would harm Sun Direct.
The
Commission also overruled the company’s objection that
the information was personal in nature saying the information
already provided to a public authority cannot fall in the domain
of unwarranted invasion of privacy. |
