Several passports in different names issued at appellant’s address - Appellant: passports were issued falsely & without his consent with motive to misuse his address - PIO: proper police verification done, no larger public interest - CIC: appeal rejected
Several passports in different names issued at appellant’s address - Appellant: they were issued falsely and without his consent and with motive to misuse his address - PIO: passports were issued after police verification and no larger public interest established for the disclosure of third party information - CIC: appeal rejected
1. Appellant submitted his RTI application dated 29 December 2012 before the CPIO, and sought information with respect to several passports in different names issued at his address falsely and without his consent and with motive to misuse his address.
2. The CPIO vide his reply dated 2 November 2012 replied that the said passports was correctly issued to Shagufta Jafri after clear police verification from the same address furnished by the persons to whom it was issued.
3. Not satisfied, the Appellant preferred first appeal on 5 December 2012 to the first Appellate Authority.
4. The FAA vide his order dated 14 January 2013, upheld the CPIO’s reply and reserved disclosure on grounds of it being personal information of a third party and accordingly exempted under RTI Act.
5. Not satisfied, the Appellant preferred Second appeal before the Central Information Commission. 1. Matter was heard today. Respondent as above appeared in person. Appellant was heard via videoconferencing from Ludhiana. Respondent argued that the Appellant had not established any larger public interest in the disclosure of information that was personal to the third party. Also, it was stated that the Appellant is not automatically entitled to accept third party information held by a public authority unless the said personal information has a relationship to a public activity of the third person (to whom it relates) which was not so in the present case. Respondent relied on the judgment of the High Court of Delhi in WP (C) 677 of 2013 and CM no. 1293 of 2013 dated 31 October 2013.
7. After hearing both parties, Commission upholds the decision of the CPIO based on the arguments presented before us today which are in conformity with the aforementioned judgement of the Delhi High Court. Accordingly appeal is dismissed.
(Smt. Deepak Sandhu)
Chief Information Commissioner
Citation: Shri Kewal Krisan Sahni v. Ministry of External Affairs in Appeal: No. CIC/SM/A/2013/000655/DS