A one stop destination for all Right to Information (RTI) matters

one stop destination for all Right to Information (RTI) matters

Information about ACP proposal - CIC is unhappy with the contradictory statements made by the Respondent which shows sheer disregard towards their own employees - CIC: Take relevant details from appellant so that requisite information should be provided

Appellant sought copies of noting w.r.t disciplinary proceedings pending against him - In a similar matter, the CIC order granting relief to the appellant has been stayed by Delhi High Court - CIC: no relief can be ordered in the matter at this stage

Percentage of attendance of student enrolled in PH.D. as per UGC - PIO: Information related to the personal information of other students, therefore the same was denied to the Appellant under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act - CIC: Denial upheld

CIC: Complainant is arguing on his grievance regarding 3rd MACP and challenging the correctness of the information provided; PIO provided information in the spirit of RTI Act - CIC: Complainant is advised about the powers of the Commission under the Act

Alleging an unethical practices of taking money for passing PG clinical exam candidates, appellant sought to know the “number of times” a third party has been invited as an examiner - CIC: Being a third party service matter, information exempt u/s 8(1)(j)

A candidate sought to know the number of attempts made for the examinations conducted by UPSC - PIO: The number of attempts of the candidates is checked at the time of final stage of selection only; Information was not available in a complied form

Vijai Sharma and K V Chowdary appointed as CIC and CVC respectively

Is the Mysore Police Commissioner’s office coming up without plan approval?

No action taken against the illegal massage parlours or spas in Goa

Are there norms about the fee a school should charge and the facilities it offers?

There is only 1 primary health centre per 28 villages of UP

Services of all OSDs / Consultants terminated by Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai

Regulation 21 of Consumer Protection Regulation does not prohibit grant of records to RTI Applicants

RTI applicant can seek compensation if a loss or detriment is suffered due to delay

Delhi HC orders removal of news articles and social media posts against a businessman on X

2nd edition of "PIOs Guide on RTI" published - Based on study of over one lakh orders of CIC and judgments of Courts - Book carries subject wise case laws, latest legal updates, Practical tips for PIOs and FAAs - Needs of all stakeholders covered

Share on facebook Tweet Email Gmail Google Rediff

PIO: The name of the students with father's name and Registration/ Enrolment Numbers who appeared from the state of Assam at the M.Sc. Examination etc. are personal information CIC upheld the denial of information u/s 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act

27 Dec, 2021

Information sought:

The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 26.06.2020 seeking the following information:

“1. Kindly furnish the name of the students with father's name and Registration/ Enrolment Numbers who appeared from the state of Assam at the M.Sc. Examination of 1984 held in the year 1986 and also specify the name of the students with Registration/Enrolment Numbers who have come out successful in the above examination along with the name of examination centres where those students appeared in the examination.

2. Kindly furnish the year from which the distance education has been offered / started by the University of Allahabad and also specify the list of syllabus/courses/programs offered under distance mode by the university.

3. Kindly provide me the certified/authenticated Xerox copy of permission/ approval etc. which was issued by the concerned authority of UGC in favour of the University of Allahabad for starting the distance education.

4. Kindly furnish about the total No. of study centres/branch of study of the said university were there in the state of Assam under distance, mode and also specify the addresses of the same.”

Having not received any response from the CPIO, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 04.08.2020. FAA’s order, if any, is not available on record.

Subsequently, the CPIO furnished a point wise reply to the appellant on 06.08.2020 stating as follows;

1. ……. the information sought are covered under section 8(1)(J) of RTI Act i.e. third party information. Hence, cannot be provided.

2. There is no distance education in University of Allahabad.

3. Not applicable.

4. Not applicable

Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the non-receipt of information, the appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.

Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:

The following were present:-

Appellant: Present through audio-conference.

Respondent: Dr. Haribansh Singh, Assistant Professor (Department of Law) & CPIO along with Dr. Shailendra Mishra, Assistant Professor (Department of Anthrapology)/ the then CPIO present through audio-conference.

The Appellant expressed his dissatisfaction with the CPIO’s reply stating that desired information against point no. 1 has not been provided to him. In response to it, the Commission apprised the Appellant that personal details of other students as sought by him at point no. 1 stands exempted from disclosure 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 RTI Act.

The CPIO relied on his written submission dated 15.12.2021 and submitted that a point wise reply along with relevant inputs has already been provided to the Appellant. He further apprised the Commission that information sought by the Appellant relates to a third party and also the fact remains that the information sought is more than 37 years old. Lastly, he added that University of Allahabad was not offering any distance mode of education and has no study centre in the State of Assam.

To a query from the Commission, the Appellant denied the receipt of averred written submission of the CPIO. In response to it, the CPIO at the behest of the Commission agreed to provide a copy of the same to the Appellant through email.

Decision:

The Commission at the outset upon perusal of records observes that the CPIO has appropriately denied the personal details of other students in response to point no. 1 to the Appellant 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 RTI Act. In this regard, attention of the Appellant is drawn towards a judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the matter of Central Public Information Officer, Supreme Court of India Vs. Subhash Chandra Agarwal in Civil Appeal No. 10044 of 2010 with Civil Appeal No. 10045 of 2010 and Civil Appeal No. 2683 of 2010wherein the import of “personal information” envisaged 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 RTI Act has been exemplified in the context of earlier ratios laid down by the same Court in the matter(s) of Canara Bank Vs. C.S. Shyam in Civil Appeal No.22 of 2009; Girish Ramchandra Deshpande vs. Central Information Commissioner &Ors., (2013) 1 SCC 212 and R.K. Jain vs. Union of India & Anr., (2013) 14 SCC 794.The following was thus held:

“59. Reading of the aforesaid judicial precedents, in our opinion, would indicate that personal records, including name, address, physical, mental and psychological status, marks obtained, grades and answer sheets, are all treated as personal information. Similarly, professional records, including qualification, performance, evaluation reports, ACRs, disciplinary proceedings, etc. are all personal information. Medical records, treatment, choice of medicine, list of hospitals the family members, information relating to assets, liabilities, income tax returns, details of investments, lending and borrowing, etc. are personal information. Such personal information is entitled to protection from unwarranted invasion of privacy and conditional access is available when stipulation of larger public interest is satisfied. This list is indicative and not exhaustive…”

Nonetheless, the factual reply given by the CPIO on all other points of RTI Application adequately suffices the information sought by the Appellant as per the provisions of RTI Act, leaving behind no scope of further relief in the matter.

Now, considering the hearing proceedings the CPIO is directed to share a copy of his written submission dated 15.12.2021 along with enclosures free of cost with the Appellant through email and via speed post. The aforesaid direction shall be complied by the CPIO within 7 days from the date of receipt of this order under due intimation to the Commission.

The appeal is disposed of accordingly.

Saroj Punhani

Information Commissioner

Citation: Sayeed Hussain Mazumder v. University of Allahabad File No : CIC/UOALD/A/2020/128759, Date of Decision: 20/12/2021

PIO: The name of the students with father's name and Registration/ Enrolment Numbers who appeared from the state of Assam at the M.Sc. Examination etc. are personal information CIC upheld the denial of information u/s 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act

Share your comments with RTI Foundation of India.