Copies of complaints filed against an employee, action taken, copy of service book and all communication between department & employee including complete notings was denied u/s 8(1)(j) - CIC: no public interest has been demonstrated, appeal rejected
8 Feb, 2014ORDER
Information sought:
The applicant has wants the certified/attested copies of the following:-
(1) Copies of all the complaints and reminders made against Shashi Bala under Rule 13-A under CCS(Conduct) Rules, 1964 read with section 3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. 1961 along with all annexures in support of the complaints/reminders as proof attached therein.
(2) Copies of all the complaints and reminders made against Shashi Bala regarding allegation of impotency charged upon the complainant by her along with all annexures in support of the complaints reminders as proof attached therein.
(3) Copies of all the complaints and reminders made against Shashi Bala regarding misuse of seat committed by her during her service along with all annexures in support of the complaints reminders attached therein.
(4) Copies of all the complaints and reminders made against Shashi Bala regarding illegal accumulation of assets by Shashi Bala along with all annexures in support of the complaints reminders attached therein.
(5) Copies of all the complaints and reminders made against Shashi Bala regarding on the basis of wrong date of birth the alleged Shashi Bala got the job in the postal department along with all annexures in support of the complaints reminders attached therein.
(6) Copies of all the action taken by the department i.e. departmental legal proceedings, disciplinary actions, inquiry proceedings along with complete notings.
(7) Copies of complete service book.
(8) Copies of all communication between department and Shashi Bala including complete notings.
(9) Copies of all the complaints and reminders made against Shashi Bala along with all the annexures in support of the complaints/reminders as proof attached therein regarding acceptance dowry articles by Shashi Bala from her parents.
(10) What was/is the past and present status of her family in public record? Kindly provide the complete details from the beginning to till date along with complete documents.
Grounds for the Second Appeal: The CPIO has refused the information 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. of the RTI Act 2005.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing: The following were present
Appellant: Absent
Respondent: Mr. Rambir Singh CPIO’s representative & Mr. Satish Kumar
The CPIO’s representative stated that from a bare reading of the appellant’s RTI applications dated 03/10/2012 it is apparent that he is seeking information relating to an employee Ms. Shashi Bala on aspects which are personal in nature/governed by the service rules and fall under the expression ‘personal information’, the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or public interest. On the other hand the disclosure of which would cause unwarranted invasion of privacy of that individual. He added that the appellant has not cited any bona fide public interest to justify the disclosure of the information and hence exemption 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. of the RTI Act has been claimed. The appellant is not present for making his submissions/contesting the facts.
Decision notice:
The exemption claimed by the CPIO’s representative for non disclosure of personal information relating to the employee Ms. Shashi Bala 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. of the RTI Act cannot be faulted as no bonafide public interest has been demonstrated by the appellant to justify its disclosure. The matter is closed.
BASANT SETH
Information Commissioner
Citation: Mr. Tara Chand Gupta v. Department of Posts in File No. CIC/BS/A/2013/000042/4354