Appellant: for denial of information u/s 8(1)(h), PIO is required to explain as to how disclosure of information would impede the process of investigation - CIC: Public authority advised a proper speaking order should have been issued for denial
15 Sep, 2014FACTS
Vide RTI dt 29.8.13, appellant had sought information on 16 points relating to certain irregularities in procurement of books/journals procured by appellant during his tenure as in charge of Library.
2. PIO vide letter dt 23.9.13, informed appellant that an Inquiry Committee has been constituted to re-examine the matter and the information sought is related to the subject matter. Hence information cannot be provided u /s 8(1)(h) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; of the RTI Act.
3. An appeal was filed on 27.9.13.
4. AA vide order dt 6.11.13, upheld the decision of the PIO.
5. Submissions made by the appellant and public authority were heard. Appellant submitted that the response of the CPIO and FAA was malafide and if they denied information u/s 8(1)(h) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; of the RTI Act, they are required to explain as to how disclosure of information would impede the process of investigation. As such, both the CPIO and the FAA have not given a speaking order and information which should have been provided, has been denied. FAA submitted that on receipt of the RTI application, they had referred the matter to the investigating officer, Shri RU Kulkarni, Scientist (G), Pune and on his advice, the information was denied u/s 8(1)(h) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; . The investigation has since been completed and a charge sheet issued to the appellant on 16.9.13. FAA further submitted that the entire information sought by the appellant has already been provided to the presenting officer on 31.7.13 and 11.8.13.
DECISION
6. The Commission directs CPIO to provide a point wise response to the appellant within ten days from date of receipt of the order. Public authority is also advised that if information was sought to be denied u/s 8(1)(h) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; , a proper speaking order should have been issued. The appeal is disposed of.
(Rajiv Mathur)
Chief Information Commissioner
Citation: Dr. A.K. Tyagi v. Defence Institute of Advanced Technology, Pune in File No.CIC/RM/A/2014/000145 File No.CIC/RM/A/2014/900142