CIC: The information sought is voluminous; PIO was right in stating that u/s 7(9), the information cannot be given - CIC: The information sought is related to many third parties and constitutes their personal information; Cannot be provided u/s 8(1)(j)
18 Dec, 2022
Information Sought
The complainant has given details of lease in respect of 107 GLR of Wellington Cantonment in his RTI application. With respect to the same, he has sought the following information:
1. Provide the names of the present HOR with address.
2. Provide the date of expiry of the lease
3. Provide the lease rent for each lease
4. And other related information.
Grounds for filing Complaint
The CPIO did not provide the desired information u/s 7(9) An information shall ordinarily be provided in the form in which it is sought unless it would disproportionately divert the resources of the public authority or would be detrimental to the safety or preservation of the record in question. An information shall ordinarily be provided in the form in which it is sought unless it would disproportionately divert the resources of the public authority or would be detrimental to the safety or preservation of the record in question. (of the RTI Act. Further, FAA has denied the information 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.
Submissions made by Complainant and Respondent during Hearing:
The complainant in his complaint submitted that since the information was incorrectly denied, necessary action may be initiated against the concerned CPIO. However, he was not present at the VC venue despite due service of notice on 21.10.2022 vide speed post acknowledgment no. ED236954398IN. The CPIO’s representative submitted that an appropriate reply was given to the complainant on 22.05.2021.
Submissions made by Complainant and Respondent during Hearing:
The complainant in his complaint submitted that since the information was incorrectly denied, necessary action may be initiated against the concerned CPIO. However, he was not present at the VC venue despite due service of notice on 21.10.2022 vide speed post acknowledgment no. ED236954398IN. The CPIO’s representative submitted that an appropriate reply was given to the complainant on 22.05.2021.
Observations:
From a perusal of the relevant case records, it is noted that undoubtedly the information sought by the complainant is voluminous and therefore the CPIO was right in stating that under Section 7(9) An information shall ordinarily be provided in the form in which it is sought unless it would disproportionately divert the resources of the public authority or would be detrimental to the safety or preservation of the record in question. An information shall ordinarily be provided in the form in which it is sought unless it would disproportionately divert the resources of the public authority or would be detrimental to the safety or preservation of the record in question. of the RTI Act, the information cannot be given. It is also noted that apart from being voluminous, the information sought is related to many third parties and constitutes their personal information and therefore the FAA was right in stating that since there is no larger public interest, the information sought cannot be provided 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 complainant too was not present to pursue his case.
Decision:
In view of the above, the complaint is not established
The appeal is disposed of accordingly
Vanaja N. Sarna
Information Commissioner
Citation: R Parthibhan v. Office of the Cantonment Board, Wellington Cantt, File No. CIC/IARMY/C/2021/132156, Date of Decision: 02/11/2022