Medical reimbursement of a government employee was denied as third party opposed the disclosure - CIC: inform whether the third party has received medical reimbursement along with the name and designation of the authority that sanctioned it
Details regarding medical reimbursement of a government employee was denied as third party opposed the disclosure – CIC: inform whether the third party has received medical reimbursement along with the name and designation of the competent authority who had sanctioned the same, this would protect the larger public interest involved in the disclosure without unnecessary intrusion in the personal space of third party
1. Appellant submitted his RTI application dated 16 March 2012 before the CPIO, North Delhi Municipal Corporation, New Delhi seeking details in respect of employment and Medical reimbursements in respect of retirement of Shri Kuldeep Singh Yadav, as Government employee through multiple points.
2. Vide CPIO Order dated 23 April 2012, RTI Application was transferred under section 6 (3) of the RTI Act to the DEC/NRZ.
3. The Appellant preferred first Appeal dated 9 August 2012 to the First Appellate Authority.
4. Vide FAA Order dated 21 August 2012, Appeal was rejected as it was not made within the time frame as prescribed in the RTI Act, 2005.
5. Being aggrieved and not being satisfied by the above response of the public authority, the appellant preferred second appeal before the Commission.
6. Matter was heard today. Both parties as above appeared in person and made submissions. Third party was also present and vehemently opposed the disclosure of information pertaining to him particularly in respect of points 5 and 6 of the RTI application under which the applicant has sought specific information as to whether the third party has received medical reimbursement in respect of expenditure incurred on treatment of his father and mother along with the name and designation of the competent authority who had sanctioned the same. Appellant submitted that he sought information disclosure in larger public interest as he had received information from the Stage Government of Haryana in response to another RTI application pertaining to the retirement of father of third party from State Government service.
7. After hearing submissions made by all the parties, Commission directs the CPIO to provide information whether the third party has been sanctioned medical reimbursement for the treatment undergone by his father and mother and also the designation of the competent authority who has sanctioned the same. This information will be provided to the appellant within three weeks of receipt of the order. Commission has taken care to protect the larger public interest involved in the disclosure of the requested information without unnecessary intrusion in the personal space of the third party.
(Smt. Deepak Sandhu)
Information Commissioner (DS)
Citation: Shri Virender Kumar Parashar v. North Delhi Municipal Corporation in Appeal: No. CIC/DS/A/2012/001984