CIC: In a private dispute between husband & wife, the basic protection afforded by the exemption from disclosure enacted u/S 8(1)(j) cannot be lifted or disturbed unless the petitioner is able to justify how such disclosure would be in ‘public interest’
11 Mar, 2016Information sought:-
The applicant has sought the following information pertaining to service particulars of Sri Taruna Kumar Gadabao A.O.(EB), o/o CGM BSNL, Bhubaneshwar:-
1. Copy of service book and salary details Gross, Net, details of recoveries made there on.
2. Loans and Advances availed by him. Purpose for which take details of repayment schedules.
3. Details of Life Insurance premium paid from Salary with LIC Policy No.
4. Details of nomination made by him in GPF/CPF/EPF and CGIES other service matters with name, age and relationship of nominee with him.
5. Name of the office and present post held by him.
6. His present residential and official address.
7. His present official phone numbers. (Office and residence)
8. Whether he has intimated his office the list of his family members including the name of his legally married wife and legitimate son.
Grounds for the Second Appeal: The CPIO has not provided the desired information.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing: The following were present
Appellant: Mrs. Subhalaxmi Lenka through VC
Respondent: Mr. S K Pani CPIO through VC
The appellant stated that she wants copy of the service book, details of deductions made from salary, loans and advances, LIC premium, name of nominee etc. of Sri T K Gadbad. The CPIO stated that he has provided the disclosable information viz. first page of service book, gross & net salary, official address & telephone number of the employee but the other information like details of loans and advances, name of nominee etc. is personal information relating to the employee and cannot be disclosed as no public interest is involved. He claimed exemption under Section 8(1)(j) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information: Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person. Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information: Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person. Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information: Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person. of the RTI Act. The appellant argued that she is the legally wedded wife of the employee and has a right to excess the information. The CPIO submitted that the mere fact that the appellant is the legally wedded wife does not enhance her right to access the information which relates to her estranged husband and is exempt under Section 8(1)(j) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information: Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person. Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information: Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person. Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information: Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person. of the RTI Act.
Decision notice:
The Hon’ble High Court of Delhi vide it decision dated 01/07/2009 [W.P.(C) 803/2009 Vijay Prakash vs. UOI and others] has held that in a private dispute, between husband and wife, the basic protection afforded by virtue of the exemption from disclosure enacted under Section 8(1)(j) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information: Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person. Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information: Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person. Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information: Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person. cannot be lifted or disturbed unless the petitioner is able to justify how such disclosure would be in ‘public interest’. In the matter at hand the appellant has not succeeded in establishing that the information sought is for larger public purpose. Hence, there is no need to interfere with the respondent’s decision. The matter is closed.
BASANT SETH
Information Commissioner
Citation: Mrs. Subhalaxmi Lenka v. BSNL in File No. CIC/BS/A/2014/000835/7288