Appellant claimed that the PIO did not provide the desired information - CIC: PIO is directed to fix a joint inspection of relevant records under his personal supervision on a mutually convenient date, time and place; Submit a Joint Inspection to the CIC
29 Aug, 2018Facts:
The appellant vide RTI application dated 16.08.2016 sought information on six points as under;
1. Details of employees who were given benefits of “largesse scheme” from January 2011 to December 2014.
2. Copies of applications submitted by concerned employees in this regard.
3. Details of date(s) of birth, appointment dates and dates(s) of filling up of relevant forms by the above employees who applied for appointment of their dependents under the “largesse scheme”.
4. Copy of the register where details regarding receipt of such applications were maintained.
5. Copy of the application of the Station master.
6. Details of the First Appellate Authority and Second Appellate Authority with relevant address(s).
The CPIO replied on 19.09.2016. The appellant was not satisfied with the CPIO’s reply and filed first appeal. The First Appellate Authority (FAA)’s order is not on record.
Aggrieved with the non-supply of the desired information from the respondent authority, the appellant filed second appeal under the provision of Section 19 of the RTI Act before the Central Information Commission on 04.03.2017.
Grounds for Second Appeal
The CPIO did not provide the desired information.
Order
Appellant : Present
Respondent : Shri Harshwardhan, Senior Divisional Personnel Officer cum PIO, North Western Railway
During the hearing, the respondent PIO submitted that they had provided the requisite reply vide their letter dated 19.09.2016. The requisite reply furnished to the appellant is just and proper and hence the case might be dismissed. The appellant submitted that he had not received the requisite reply from the respondent authority concerned. The respondent PIO is directed to resend the reply dated 19.09.2016 within 07 days of the receipt of this order to the appellant by speed post keeping the postal tracking number as record. The despatch details are to be submitted to the Commission within 07 more days thereafter.
On perusal of the relevant case record, it was noted by the Commission that the sought for information on point nos. 1,2 and 3 of the stated RTI 3 application relates to the third parties’ personal 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. of the RTI Act. The sought for information on point no. 4 was already provided to the appellant properly by the respondent. During the hearing, the respondent PIO submitted that a facility of joint inspection of relevant records was already provided to the appellant on point no. 5 of the said RTI application. The appellant submitted that he was not satisfied with the same facility. The Commission observed that on point 5, the facility of joint inspection should be provided to the appellant once again as the records involved are huge in number.
The respondent CPIO is directed to fix a joint inspection of relevant records relating to the point no. 5 of the above stated RTI application under his personal supervision on a mutually convenient date and at mutually convenient time and place. Based on the joint inspection, certified copies of records as selected by the appellant and as available with the respondent authority concerned which are not personal information of third parties 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. of the RTI Act are to be provided then and there to the appellant free of charge u/s 7(6) of the RTI Act. The action is to be completed within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.
After the Joint Inspection is over, a report on the Joint Inspection signed by the respondent CPIO, duly countersigned by the appellant with his remark(s), if any, is to be submitted within 7 days thereafter to the Commission for perusal and record. With the above observation/direction, the appeal is disposed of.
Copies of the order be sent to the concerned parties free of cost.
[Amitava Bhattacharyya]
Information Commissioner
Citation: Vikram Kumar v. North Western Railway in File No :CIC/NWRLY/A/2017/114613, Date of hearing : 09.05.2018