Key facts
- The Central Information Commission (CIC) found PNGRB's response to an RTI application inadequate.
- The RTI sought details on safety measures, inspections, and regulatory oversight of IGL's pipeline work.
- PNGRB had sought inputs from IGL and forwarded the information received.
- The CIC stated that PNGRB is the custodian of the information and should not rely on IGL.
- PNGRB was ordered to provide a revised, point-wise consolidated reply.
- The question of IGL being a public authority under RTI will be addressed separately.
The Central Information Commission (CIC) has criticized the Petroleum and Natural Gas Regulatory Board (PNGRB) for its insufficient response to a Right to Information (RTI) application. The application sought specific details regarding safety measures, inspections, and regulatory oversight related to gas pipeline work conducted by Indraprastha Gas Limited (IGL) in a west Delhi area.
During the hearing, PNGRB indicated that it had requested information from IGL and subsequently forwarded what it received to the applicant. IGL maintained that it had supplied all available factual data to the regulator and raised questions about the applicability of the RTI Act to the company, a matter then pending before the Delhi High Court.