Tapan Choudhury v. The Central Public Information Officer and Ors.

1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

2. The Petitioner challenges the impugned order dated 25th April, 2018 passed by Respondent No. 1- The Central Public Information Officer, RoC, Delhi, Ministry of Corporate Affairs (hereinafter ‘CPIO MCA’). In addition, the Petitioner seeks a direction to be issued to the Respondent No. 1 to provide information in terms of his Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI) application dated 26th July, 2016. The said RTI application made by the Petitioner reads as: “Subject- Information regarding search Report for Incorporation of WORLD BOOK INDIA PVT LTD under RTI, Act 2005 Sir, With reference to the subject cited above, I would like to seek information on the relevant SEARCH REPORT for name which was processed by the dealing hand "Miss Surinder Kaur" and approved by AROC Mr Atma Sah to make provisions for incorporation of a company by the name WORLD BOOK INDIA PVT LTD incorporated on 24th August. The SEARCH REPORT is required on an urgent basis. Information sought is required urgently as connected matter is pending adjudication in the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in CS(OS) 1043/2013.”

3. The primary issue in this case is in respect of the name ‘World Book India Private Limited’ which was registered by the MCA despite the existence of another Company i.e., ‘World Book Company Private Limited’.

4. In the present case, the Petitioner sought information in respect of incorporation of ‘World Book India Private Limited’ as to whether the search conducted by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA) prior to registering the said company, reflected the ‘World Book Company Private Limited’ name or not.

5. The said information was sought to be responded to by the CPIO- MCA on 19th August, 2016 in the following terms: - “Relevant search report for the name which was processed by the dealing hands to make provisions for incorporation of a company by the name WORLD BOOK INDIA PVT LTD. Incorporated on 24th August,2012 as available is enclosed marked ss Annexure 1.”

6. Unfortunately, however, the CPIO-MCA’s annexure related to the company ‘Childcraft India Pvt. Ltd.’ and not ‘World Book Company Private Limited’.

7. An appeal was preferred by the Petitioner before the First Appellate Authority under Section 19(1) of the RTI Act, 2005 which was disposed of vide order dated 28th September, 2016. In the said appeal, the following order was passed: - “The Central public Information officer has attended the RTI Application and furnished/forwarded reply thereof vide his letter no. RTI/2016/lAP/656 dated 19.08.2016 but appellant has filed an appeal against the reply of CPIO. The undersigned perused the case file thoroughly and it is observed that there are two search reports available in MCA records and as stated in the appeal, copy of one search report (which was searched by first name"Childcraft') was attached with the RTI reply given by the CPIO, hence other search report as available in the record (which was searched by first name “world”) is now attached herewith for the appellant's information.”

8. The information attached with this order reads as under:- Search Result CIN/1A Ref No Company Name B43923630 World Book India Private Limited U22220DL2012PTC236382 WORLD BOOK COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED U55101TN1999PTC043161 WORLDWIDE HOTEI, BOOKING CENTRE (INDIA)

PRIVATE LIMITED

9. The Petitioner then approached the Central Information Commission by way of a Second Appeal under Section 19(3) of the RTI Act, 2005. Vide order dated 25th April, 2018, while deciding the said Second Appeal, CIC observed as under:-

10. The submission of the Petitioner, appearing in person is that the search report which was provided by the First Appellate Authority was incorrect inasmuch as the Company name ‘World Book Company Private Limited’ ought to have appeared on top at serial no. 1 as it was previously incorporated.

11. This Court observes that the purpose of conducting a search prior to registering any company is to ensure that no company with a similar name is already registered under the Companies Act, 2013. While conducting such a search, the date of incorporation would be very relevant and, therefore, the searching Authority has to take due care that similar names are not registered by it, so as to avoid disputes between companies with identical or similar names, incorporated under the Companies Act.