Copies of several grievances filed by appellant sought – PIO denied u/s 8(1)(j) stating that this is personal information – appellant is himself the custodian and originator of letters written to the public authority – CIC: denial sustainable in law
Vide RTI dt 7.8.11, appellant had sought information on 3 points with reference to CCIT-VII letter dt 2.8.11, seeking copies of several grievances filed by him.
2. CPIO vide letter dt 8.9.11, provided a response.
3. An appeal was filed on 16.9.11.
4. AA vide order dt 19.10.11, upheld the decision of CPIO and disposed of the appeal.
5. Submissions made by the appellant were heard.
6. The Commission finds that the response of the public authority seeking exemption u/s 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. stating that this is personal information, is misconceived. However, the Commission in its judgement dt 26.2.2007 (CIC/AT/A/2007/00018) has held as follows:
“The denial of the certified copy of the letters written by the appellant himself to the public authority is also sustainable in law insofar as the appellant is himself the custodian and originator of those letters. These cannot be said to be in the exclusive control of or held exclusively by the public authority. There is no reason why the information which the appellant himself possesses should be supplied to him by the public authority.”
7. In view of the above, the decision of the CPIO in denying the information is upheld and the appeal is disposed of.
Central Information Commissioner
Citation: Mr. S.P. Goyal v. DCIT and CCIT in File No. CIC/DS/A/2011/004039