CIC backs denial of RTI on India’s Russia oil imports
The Central Information Commission upheld denial of RTI data on India’s oil imports from Russia, citing commercial confidentiality and strategic interests, while directing Petroleum Planning and Analysis Cell to improve transparency and disclosures on its website
New Delhi: Data on oil imports from Russia to India cannot be provided as it is exempted under the RTI Act due to its “commercial and confidential” nature, according to the Petroleum Planning and Analysis Cell (PPAC) under the Oil Ministry, with the Central Information Commission too backing it, citing strategic and economic interests of the country.
The case relates to an RTI plea seeking details of crude oil imported from Russia to India between June 2022 and June 2025, including a company-wise breakup for firms such as IOCL, BPCL, HPCL, ONGC Videsh, Reliance Industries and Nayara Energy.
The Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) had denied the information, stating: “The information pertaining to country-wise and company-wise details of crude oil import is of commercial and confidential nature and is exempted from disclosure under section 8(1) (d&e) of the RTI Act 2005.
However, the total quantity and value of crude oil import (both current and historical) can be downloaded from the PPAC website.” The First Appellate Authority upheld this reply. During the hearing recently, the appellant argued that the information was not provided and said he wanted to understand how India is functioning in the sector.
In its interim decision, the Commission observed that disclosure of the requested data “would prejudicially affect the strategic and economic interest of the State and also affect the relations with foreign states,” adding that the information is linked to geopolitical relations. It held the exemption valid under Sections 8(1)(a) and 8(1)(d) of the RTI Act, and said no further relief was warranted.
The Commission also issued a show-cause notice to the official concerned of the PPAC, which functions under the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, for being absent from the hearing despite receiving prior notice, asking why a penalty under Section 20(1) of the RTI Act should not be imposed.
The Commission added that “the respondent’s website with respect to the Right to Information tab does not have any information,” and directed the authority “to ensure compliance with Section 4 of the RTI Act, 2005.” Invoking its powers under Section 25(5) of the RTI Act, the Commission also recommended that the public authority improve suo motu disclosures under Section 4(1)(b).
These include publishing details of its organisation, functions and duties; powers and duties of officers and employees; categories of documents held; a directory of officers and employees; and the monthly remuneration received by each officer and employee, including the system of compensation as per regulations.
