CIC: Structural stability certificate of the Jama Guest House is its personal information held by the Licensing Unit, Delhi Police in a fiduciary capacity - CIC: Appellant has not been able to establish what public interest would be served by disclosure
19 Oct, 2016ORDER
1 Shri Rajiv Andhiwal filed an application dated 05.02.2015 under the Right to Information Act, 2005 before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Licensing Unit, Delhi Police seeking information on three queries relating to Jama Guest House running in P. No.2211, Rajguru Road, Chuna Mandi, Paharganj, New Delhi, including (i) whether this guest house is having a Lodging License issued by the Licensing Unit, Delhi Police if so, a copy of the same may be provided.
2. The appellant filed second appeal before the Commission on the ground that the CPIO did not furnish information on point Nos. 2 and 3 of the RTI application stating that the information cannot be provided since the Licensee of M/s Jama Guest House has disagreed to disclose the information to the third party under the provisions of 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. of the RTI Act, 2005 and that the First Appellate Authority (FAA) upheld the reply of the CPIO. The appellant requested the Commission to direct the CPIO/FAA concerned to provide the information sought by him since he cannot be considered Third Party being a resident of the same premises wherein the said Guest House was running.
Hearing:
3. The appellant Shri Rajiv Andhiwal and the respondent Shri Ved Prakash, APIO and ACP, Delhi Police were present in person.
4. The appellant submitted that a copy of the structural stability certificate of the Jama Guest House has not been provided to him in response to his RTI application dated 05.02.2015. Further, the appellant submitted that the information sought by him is directly related to the premises wherein the said Guest House was running and living in the same property i.e. 2211, Raj guru Road, Chuna Mandi, Paharganj, New Delhi and have the right to get such information from the Department and he is not a third party.
5. The respondent submitted that the information sought by the appellant is in the nature of ‘personal information’ of a third party. Accordingly, they had initiated action under Section 11(1) Where a Central Public Information Officer or a State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, intends to disclose any information or record, or part thereof on a request made under this Act, which relates to or has been supplied by a third party and has been treated as confidential by that third party, the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, shall, within five days from the receipt of the request, give a written notice to such third party of the request and of the fact that the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, intends to disclose the information or record, or part thereof, and invite the third party to make a submission in writing or orally, regarding whether the information should be disclosed, and such submission of the third party shall be kept in view while taking a decision about disclosure of information: of the RTI Act. The third party informed them not to disclose the information sought in the RTI application. Therefore, the information sought under point 2 and 3 of the RTI application has been denied 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. of the RTI Act.
6. The respondent submitted that the structural stability certificate has been provided by the Jama Guest House and is held by the respondent in fiduciary capacity and hence, disclosure of the same is exempted under Section 8(1)(e) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship, unless the competent authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship, unless the competent authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; of the RTI Act.
Decision:
7. The Commission observes that structural stability certificate has not been issued by the DCP, Licensing Unit. Rather, the certificate, which is a personal information of Jama Guest House has been submitted by the Guest House to the DCP, Licensing Unit as part of documents required for licensing and hence, is held by the DCP in a fiduciary capacity. The appellant has not been able to establish what public interest would be served by the disclosure of the Structural stability certificate submitted by the Jama Guest House to the DCP, Licensing Unit. In view of the above, the structural stability certificate submitted by the Jama Guest House is exempted from disclosure under Section 8(1)(e) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship, unless the competent authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship, unless the competent authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; and (j) of the RTI Act.
8. With the above observations, the appeal is disposed of.
9. Copy of decision be given free of cost to the parties.
(Sudhir Bhargava)
Information Commissioner
Citation: Shri Rajiv Andhiwal v. Delhi Police in Decision No. CIC/VS/A/2014/001225/SB