Appellant sought copies of investigation report and action taken on his CVC Complaint no. 40616/2016 alleging corruption and forgery - CIC: Provide the information in the form of final outcome of CVC complaint after invoking section 10 of RTI Act

Information Sought:

The Appellant has sought copies of investigation report and action taken on his CVC Complaint no. 40616/2016 filed against Mr. S.J. Chowdhary, Senior Manager India United Mills No. 5 and other 3 officers alleging corruption and forgery.

Grounds for Complaint:

The CPIO did not provide the desired information.

Submissions made by Appellant and Respondent during Hearing:

The Appellant submitted that misleading information has been provided to him by PIO vide his letter dated 12.01.2017 and apart from this, no other reply has been provided to him. He further submitted that information should be provided to him as it was based on his complaint that certain action was initiated against the erring officials

CPIO submitted that initially CVC complaint no. 40616/2016 was not received in the Vigilance Section of NTC Limited and it was only after their personal efforts that they were able to get a copy of the same from Ministry of Textiles via fax on 15.05.2017. Thereafter, an appropriate reply has been provided to the Complainant vide letter dated 17.03.2017. He further submitted that sought for information pertains to many third parties and the same is exempt 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. 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.

Observation:

Based on relief sought by the Appellant and his oral submissions made during the hearing, the instant matter has been treated as Second Appeal.

From a perusal of the relevant case records, it was noted by the Commission that till date no final reply has been provided to the Appellant. It was also noted that sought for information i.e. copies of investigation report and action taken on CVC Compliant no. 40616/2016 filed against certain officials is a third party information exempted 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. 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.

The Commission observes that the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide decision dated 03.10.2012 in the case of Shri Girish Ramchandra Deshpande Vs CIC& Others(SLP(C) NO 27734 OF 2012) has observed that disciplinary orders and the documents in the course of disciplinary proceedings are personal information within the meaning 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. .

The Commission also relies on the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the matter of UPSC vs R.K.Jain in LPA No. 618/2012. The operative part of the decision is as follows:

11. ..............................The ratio of the dicta aforesaid of the Supreme Court is that the disciplinary orders and the documents in the course of disciplinary proceedings are personal information within the meaning 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. and the disclosure of which normally has no relationship to any public activities or public interest and disclosure of which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of an individual.

Decision:

Based on the submission of the Appellant that it was on the basis of his complaint only that departmental action was initiated against certain officials, the Commission directs Respondent (1) to provide sought for information to the Appellant in the form of final outcome of CVC complaint No 40616/2016 after invoking section 10 of the RTI Act within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order and a compliance report to this effect shall be duly sent to the Commission by the concerned CPIO. He is also directed to resend the reply dated 7.03.2017 to the Appellant through speed post within 05 days from the receipt of this order.

The Appeal is accordingly disposed of.

Vanaja N. Sarna

Information Commissioner

Citation: Harendra R Kosia v. National Textile Corporation Ltd. in Decision no.: CIC/MOTXT/C/2017/115259/00019, Date of Decision: 06/02/2019