Reasons for non-issuance of certificate of registration of copyright of artistic work of a company who was appellant’s client - FAA: registration certificate has already been sent to company - CIC: it is third party personal information; appeal rejected

Reasons for non-issuance of certificate of registration of copyright of artistic work of a company was sought - FAA: registration certificate has already been sent to the company - Appellant: company was his client - CIC: it is third party personal information and no larger public interest is involved, appeal rejected

ORDER

FACTS

Vide RTI dt 29.4.13, appellant had sought reasons for non-issuance of certificate of registration of copyright of artistic work ‘Kitchen King’ of M/s Pari Agro Exports, Amritsar despite lapse of two years. If the ROC has been issued details of dispatch be provided.

2 PIO vide letter dt 12.6.13, informed the appellant that as per their records, the certificate has been issued and dispatched.

3. An appeal was filed on 24.6.13.

4. AA vide order dt 12.8.13, informed the appellant that the registration certificate has already been sent and provided the address of the same.

5. Submissions made by the appellant were heard. He submitted that his client M/s Pari Agro Exports have not received the certificate. In response to a query from the Commission as to prove that the appellant was acting on behalf of M/s Pari Agro Exports, appellant submitted that as per the RTI Act he has a right to seek information. In the absence of the public authority, their views could not be ascertained.

DECISION

6. The Commission finds that the information sought relates to a third party, M/s Pari Agro Exports and as no larger public interest is involved, the information sought is denied 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. of the RTI Act. The appeal is disposed of.

(Rajiv Mathur)

Central Information Commissioner

Citation: Shri Kamal Kishore Arora v. MHRD, Deptt. of Higher Education in File No. CIC/RM/A/2013/000904