Fee: 30 days would be counted from the date of receipt of the RTI application in the public authority and not from the date of receipt by PIO – CIC: names of the persons making recommendations is liable to be disclosed after Padma awards are awarded
8 Nov, 2013Fee: the 30 days would be counted from the date of receipt of the RTI application in the public authority and not from the date of receipt by the PIO - once the Padma Awards are finally awarded, the names of the persons making recommendations/nominations is liable to be disclosed - larger public interest is involved in disclosure of such information - nominations / recommendation do not qualify to be personal information or confidential information
ORDER
This is the 2nd appeal filed by Shri Subhash Chandra Agrawal against Ministry of Home Affairs, corresponding to his RTI application dated 28.01.2013 seeking information relating to Padma Awards – 2013.
2. In his RTI application, Shri Agrawal had sought information on 28 points relating to list of nominations for Padma Awards – 2013. Vide letter dated 8.3.2013, the CPIO provided pointwise replies to the appellant. However, not satisfied with the reply, the appellant filed first appeal dated 11.3.2013 stating that the names of recommending persons were not provided. The first appellate authority held that name of the recommending authority is a personal information and it cannot be provided under section 8 (1) (j) of the RTI Act, 2005.
3. In the 2nd appeal petition filed before the Commission, the appellant interalia, stated as under: i) The CPIO demanded for photocopying charges after a lapse of stipulated period of 30 days. Therefore the copying charges be refunded to him. ii) The CPIO, provided the documents on payment of copying charges and the same were incomplete. iii) He had requested in his first appeal dated 11.3.2013, to provide names of recommending persons for each of the recommended ones, since the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) had provided not only names of recommending persons, but also all papers sent by recommending ones along with the recommendations in respect of earlier year. iv) CPIO demanded a total sum of rupees eighty six in respect of query numbers (1), (7), (8), (9), (11), (23), (24) and (28) allegedly because she received RTI petition dated 28.1.2013 through Speed Post. The Speed Post in local delivery is delivered on the next working day. Therefore, an enquiry be ordered and copies of related incoming registers for mails and file movement of RTI petition may be provided to ascertain that his RTI petition addressed to Director(A & V) & CPIO at MHA really reached to the CPIO on 8.3.2013.
4. Pursuant to the Commission’s Notice dated 09.07.2013, the matter was heard on 12.08.2013. The appellant Shri Agrawal was present in person The respondents were represented by Ms. Shyamala Mohan, Director(A&V) & CPIO and Shri Pandey Pradeep Kumar, US(P).
5. Heard the oral submissions of both the parties and perused the documents available in the file. The appellant has filed the second appeal for seeking the names of recommending persons for each nomination free of cost. The appellant submits vide his second appeal that the Prime Minister’s Office has provided the names of recommending persons along with all papers sent by recommending ones.
6. The issues under consideration before the Commission are as follows: (A) Whether the CPIO was correct in demanding photocopying charges. (B) Whether the names of the recommending persons are exempted 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. 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. `
7. These issues are discussed in the following paragraphs.
(A) Whether the CPIO correct in demanding photocopying charges.
8. It is observed that the O.M. No. A43020/ 01/2013RTI dated 06.02.2013, Shri S Samanta had categorically stated that the RTI application was received on 30.01.2013. Even, the Public authority issued a Receipt No. 23515 dated 01.02.2013 regarding receipt of the postal order given in the said RTI application. It could be that the CPIO would have received the RTI application on 08.02.2013, but the 30 days would be counted from the date of receipt of the RTI application in the public authority and not from the date of receipt by the CPIO. Thus, CPIO was not correct in demanding the photocopying charges. Even, the First Appellate Authority did not apply his mind to examine as to whether the information was provided within the stipulated period or not and the CPIO was correct in demanding the photocopying charges.
9. There is no doubt that the RTI application dated 28.01.2013 was received in the Public Authority on 30.01.2013. It was not open to the CPIO to demand copying charges after a lapse of stipulated period of 30 days. The CPIO is therefore, directed to return the photocopying charges to the appellant within 2 weeks of the receipt of this Order.
(B) Whether the names of the recommending persons are exempted 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. 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.
10. In his RTI application the appellant had interalia, asked for information on the following items:
Item No. 1. List of nominations for Padma Awards – 2013 having reached to Union Home Ministry by last dated 20.11.2012 of receiving nominations with names of those recommending nominations, authority through which Union Home Ministry received such nominations, authority through which Union Home Ministry received such nominations and dates on which such nominations reached to (a) recommending authorities and (b) Union Home Ministry.
Item No. 2. Names of “Search –CommitteeMembers” formed to recommend PadmaAwards2013.
Item No. 3. Names considered by “Search–Committee” being recommended for PadmaAwards2013
Item No. 4. Names of nominees recommended by “Search– Committee” PadmaAwards2013
11. While furnishing reply, the CPIO did not disclose the names of those recommending nominations and nor were any reason given by the CPIO for such nondisclosure. It was the First Appellate Authority, who stated that this information can not be disclosed 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. 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. The relevant para of the order of the First Appellate Authority is reproduced below: “The information pertaining to query no.14 which could not be provided earlier, has already been provided to the appellant vide this Ministry’s letter No. 24/19/2012Public dated 28.2.2013. Name of recommending authority is a personal information and it cannot be provided 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. 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. Demand of Rs. 86 is correct as the application of the applicant was received by the CPIO on 8.2.2013 and the reply was given in prescribed date.”
12. The relevant portion 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. 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. are reproduced below:
“8. (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give information to any citizen,— xxxxxx xxxxxx (j) 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 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.
13. Needless to that that the Padma Awards are the highest civilian award conferred for distinguished work in various fields. As per the information available on the website of Ministry of Home Affairs, the award seeks to recognize work of any distinction and is given for distinguished and exceptional achievements / service in all fields of activities / disciplines, such as Art, Literature and Education, Sports, Medicine, Social Work, Science and Engineering , Public Affairs, Civil Service, Trade and Industry etc. It is the usual practice is to invite recommendations every year from all State/UT Governments, Ministries / Departments of the Government of India, Bharat Ratna and Padma Vibhushan awardees and Institutes of Excellence by 1st October. Recommendations received from them and also from other sources like Ministers, Chief Ministers/Governors of State, Members of Parliament, as also private individuals, bodies etc., are placed before the Padma Award Committee. In the Proforma for Padma Awards, the recommending person has to give citation in the form of a write up in narrative form indicating distinctions / achievements obtained in the concerned field of activity.
14. Thus, giving recommendations for Padma Awards is open to the public as per the notification inviting recommendations/nominations, which is published on the website of Ministry of Home Affairs. Private individuals or bodies etc. are not bound to recommend the names of the person for Padma Awards under any law or statute; they do so on their own. The Commission is of the view that such nominations / recommendation do not qualify to be personal information or confidential information the disclosure of which would cause unwarranted invasion of privacy of the person recommending / nominating names of persons. Moreover, the list of names of the persons nominated/recommended is already in the public domain. The respondent have not been able to establish how the names of the persons making recommendations/nominations falls under the category of personal information of persons making recommendations/nominations, whereas the names of the recommended / nominated persons is already in the public domain.
15. In its decision No. CIC/WB/A/2008/00976SM dated 21.10.2009, (Jaikishan Aggarwal Vs M.H.A.) the Commission had observed as under: “From the reply of the CPIO and the order of the first Appellate Authority, it is clear that the process of recommending names for the Padma Awards is highly discretionary. With the advent of the Right to Information (RTI) and increasing scrutiny of the governmental decisions in its wake, it is likely that the process of deciding these awards will be questioned by the citizens more and more in future. Therefore, the authorities must strive to lay down, as far as possible, transparent criteria for these nominations and make the selection process more objective.”
16. With regard to conferment of Padma Awards, the Commission had received various requests for disclosure of norms regarding list of nominations, selection procedure, eligibility criteria, and other such details concerning the selection of Padma awardees. The then Chief Information Commissioner, wrote a letter dated 31.05.2013 to the Hon’ble Minister of Home Affairs, wherein he stated as under: “……..in pursuance of the objectives of the RTI Act, 2005, the constant endeavor of Government Departments and every public authority is to take steps to provide as much information suo-moto at regular intervals through various means of communication, including the internet, so that the public have minimum resort to use of the Act to obtain information. …….I therefore, request you to kindly issue instructions to your Ministry to post relevant details of information regarding procedure for selection of Padma Awardees in your Departmental website a the earliest as well as the details of the nominations received fro the Awards in 201213, minutes of the Selection Committee and the approval(s) of the various authorities.”
17. In view of the above, the Commission feels that the disclosure of information asked for undoubtedly has a relationship to public activity and larger public interest is involved in disclosure of such information, once the Padma Awards are finally awarded. The CPIO is, therefore, directed to disclose the names of the persons making recommendation/nomination to the appellant free of cost within three weeks from the receipt of this order.
18. The appeal is disposed of with the above directions.
Sushma Singh
Information Commissioner
Citation: Shri Subhash Chandra Agrawal v. Ministry of Home Affairs in F. No. CIC/SS/A/2013/001648