Copies of compassionate ground appointment letters issued to the dependents of the deceased employees were denied quoting an incorrect exemption clause - CIC: First appeal not disposed on time which is a sorry state of affairs; PIO and FAA cautioned
11 Dec, 2022
Information Sought
The appellant has sought the following information:
- Provide copies of the appointment letters issued to the dependents of the deceased employees for appointment on compassionate grounds during the period from 01/01/2012 to 17/03/2021.
Grounds for filing Second Appeal
The CPIO did not provide the desired information.
Submissions made by Appellant and Respondent during Hearing:
The appellant’s representative submitted that the father of the appellant was an employee and hence, information should be given.
The CPIO submitted that a suitable reply was given on 13.04.2021. The FAA also held that information relating to appointment letters of third party cannot be given.
Observations:
The Commission observed that the information sought is related to third parties and rightly rejected by the respondent. However, the exemption clause was not correctly quoted. The personal information of third parties are 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. of the RTI Act. The FAA failed to dispose of the first appeal on time which is a sorry state of affairs.
Decision:
The CPIO and the FAA both are cautioned to be careful regarding the provisions of the RTI Act. Be that as it may, no relief can be given to the appellant as no larger public interest was substantiated by the appellant’s representative and this is third party information, duly exempted under the RTI Act.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly
Vanaja N. Sarna
Information Commissioner
Citation: Rajesh Nayak v. The CPIO O/o the Cantonment Board Ramgarh, File No. CIC/IARMY/A/2021/132210, Date of Decision: 02/11/2022