Information regarding special promotion, awards /medals to police personal & file notings was denied u/s 8(1)(e) - Respondent: information is voluminous & scattered in many files – CIC: inspection of the relevant files & records ordered
4 Apr, 2014ORDER
Facts
1. The appellant filed an application dated 21.12.2012 under the RTI Act seeking information regarding special promotion and file notings. CPIO responded on 17.01.2013. Appellant filed first appeal with the first appellate authority (FAA) on 14.02.2013. Copy of the FAA’s order is not enclosed. Appellant filed this present second appeal on 15.05.2013.
Hearing
2. Appellant and respondent were present before the Commission.
3. Appellant referred to her RTI application and stated that she was seeking information regarding police personnel given special promotion, and such other pertinent issues as mentioned in the RTI application.
4. Appellant stated that she had received the information on point 1 and 2 of the RTI application but the information on point 3 had not been received.
5. Appellant stated on point 3 of the RTI application that she sought information regarding the decisions about awards and medals on the said police personnel. Appellant stated that the respondent had denied the information under section 8(1)(e) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship, unless the competent authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship, unless the competent authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship, unless the competent authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship, unless the competent authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; of the RTI Act. In the context of the contents of section 8(1)(e) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship, unless the competent authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship, unless the competent authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship, unless the competent authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship, unless the competent authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; of the Act the appellant stated that the information sought by her was not fiduciary in nature. Appellant stated that there was no reason for denying the information to her.
6. Respondent stated that the information sought by the appellant on point 3 of the RTI application was voluminous and scattered in many files. The respondent said that the information on point 3 was not available in the manner in which the appellant is seeking it. Respondent stated that the information on point 3 of the RTI application was denied under section 8(1)(e) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship, unless the competent authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship, unless the competent authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship, unless the competent authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship, unless the competent authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; of the Act. Respondent stated that the appellant had no connection with the information she sought. Respondent also stated that in the file notings, comments and remarks of various senior officers were mentioned and this could not be provided to the appellant.
7. It was apparent from the hearing that the information sought by the appellant is not covered by section 8(1)(e) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship, unless the competent authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship, unless the competent authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship, unless the competent authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship, unless the competent authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; of the RTI Act. It also emerged that there is no apparent reason to deny the appellant an opportunity to inspect the file.
Decision
8. Respondent is directed to enable the appellant, within 30 days of this order, to inspect the relevant files and records in context of point 3 of the RTI application. The appeal is disposed of. Copy of decision be given free of cost to the parties.
(Vijai Sharma)
Information Commissioner
Citation: Dr. Manisha Sethi v. Delhi Police in Decision No.CIC/SS/A/2013/001555/VS/06241