Central Information Commission
P Irissane vs Ut Of Puducherry on 19 November, 2025
केन्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ मागग, मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई निल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
File No: Two cases
(1) CIC/UTPON/A/2024/114091
(2) CIC/UTPON/A/2024/114188
P Irissane .....अपीलकर्ाग /Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
PIO,
Superintendent of Police (HQ),
Daman Street, Police Head
Quarters, Puducherry - 605001 ....प्रनर्वािीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 17.11.2025
Date of Decision : 19.11.2025
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari
The above-mentioned Second Appeals are clubbed together for disposal
through common order as the parties are common and the subject matter
are identical in nature.
(1) CIC/UTPON/A/2024/114091
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 31.01.2024
CPIO replied on : 29.02.2024
First appeal filed on : 13.03.2024
First Appellate Authority's order : 09.04.2024
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 25.04.2024
Information sought:
CIC/UTPON/A/2024/114091 Page 1 of 81. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 31.01.2024 (offline) seeking the following information:
"The following Information in respect of Sub-Inspector of Police appointment from the year 1990 to December 2011.
1. How many numbers of Sub-Inspector of Police appointed under Compassionate ground till December 2011. Please supply the information, including Name and Designation at Present.
2. During (January 2001 to December 2010) how many Sub-Inspector of Police filled on compassionate Ground.
3. During (January 2011 to December 2013) How many Sub-Inspector of Police appointed under Compassionate Ground. please supply the information including Name and Address.
4. During (January 2001 to December 2013) How many Sub-Inspector of Police appointed as Direct Recruitment. Please supply the information in year wise.
5. During (January 1990 to December 2000) How many Sub-Inspector of Police appointed as Direct Recruitment. Please supply the information in year wise.
6. How many numbers of Sub-Inspector of Police are appointed through Ex-Service men quota and sportsman quota till date. Please supply the information in year wise, in which year Recruitment and Names."
2. The PIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 29.02.2024 stating as under:
"No appointment to the post of Sl of Police was made under compassionate grounds during the period from 2001 to 2011 since no records are available for the period prior to the year 2001.
Thiru P. Pradaban was the only candidate appointed to the post of Sub- Inspector of Police under compassionate grounds during the period from Jan 2011 to Dec' 2013.
Particulars of the Sub-Inspector of Police-appointed through Direct Recruitment for the period from the year 2001 to 2013 are available in e this office as below:CIC/UTPON/A/2024/114091 Page 2 of 8
Year No. of SI appointed 2003 19 2004 19 2007 19 2011 40 2012 01 (Compassionate)
No records are available for the period prior to the year 2001. As per the records available in the Office, the following Meritorial Sports Persons (MSP) / Ex-servicemen (XSM) were selected as Sub-Inspector of Police by Direct Recruitment Year Name Tvl. Category No. of persons selected 2007 V.Gogolakrishnan MSP 2 M.Ramamoorthy MSP 2007 V.Newtone XSM 2 M.Venkatesan XSM 2011 K.Rajasekar MSP 2 M.Murugan MSP Zaquir Qussene XSM 4 B.Mali XSM Pramod Kayanadath XSM D.Venkadesaperumal XSM "
3. Being dissatisfied, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 13.03.2024. The FAA vide its order dated 09.04.2024, upheld the reply of CPIO and also furnished a revised reply on point No. 1 and 2 of RTI application by stating as under:-
"Thiru Chinta Kodhandaram, Superintendent of Police holding the present post of CDC basis was initially appointed as Sub-Inspector of Police on 28.02.1991 on compassionate grounds."
4. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
5. A written submission dated 12.11.2025 filed by Shri R Mohankumar, SP (HQ)-cum-PIO reiterating the chain of correspondence forwarded to the Appellant pertaining to this case is taken on record. A copy of the same has already been endorsed to the Appellant.
(2) CIC/UTPON/A/2024/114188 Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
CIC/UTPON/A/2024/114091 Page 3 of 8RTI application filed on : 31.01.2024 CPIO replied on : 29.02.2024 First appeal filed on : 13.03.2024
First Appellate Authority's order : 09.04.2024 2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 25.04.2024 Information sought:
6. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 31.01.2024 (offline) seeking the following information:
"1. The copy of the minutes for selection by mode of Direct Recruitment to the post of Sub-Inspector of Police in Government of Puducherry, which is held during the year from 2001 to 2012.
2. The copy of the minutes for selection by mode of Direct Recruitment to the post of Sub-Inspector of Police in Government of Puducherry, which is held during the year from 1990 to 2000.
3. The copy of the name list of the selected /appointed candidates through Compassionate grounds to the post of Sub-Inspector of Police in Government of Puducherry during the years from 2001 to 2011 may please be furnished.
4. The copy of the name list of the selected /appointed candidates through Compassionate grounds to the post of Sub-Inspector of Police in Government of Puducherry during the years from 2001 to 2013 may please be furnished."
7. The CPIO furnished a point-wise reply to the Appellant on 29.02.2024 stating as under:
"1 & 2 As per Section 8 (1) (e) under RTI Act, 2005, the requested information could not be furnished.
3 No appointment to the post of Sl of Police was made under compassionate grounds during the years from 2001 to 2011.
4 Thiru. P. Pradaban was the only candidate appointed to the post of Sub-Inspector Police under Compassionate grounds on 27.11.2012 (i.e) during the period from 2001 to 2013"CIC/UTPON/A/2024/114091 Page 4 of 8
8. Being dissatisfied, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 13.03.2024. The FAA vide its order dated 09.04.2024, upheld the reply of CPIO.
9. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
10. A written submission dated 12.11.2025 filed by Shri R. Mohankumar, SP- cum-PIO is taken on record. A copy of which has already been endorsed to the Appellant. Contents of the same are reproduced below for ready reference:
"With reference to the subject cited above, it is informed that, the appellant in his RTI Application dated 31.01.2024 addressed to PIO, Superintendent of Police, Head Quarters. Puducherry requested to furnish the information under RTI Act, 2005. The required information has been furnished to the applicant vide No. 14/SP(HQ)/RTI/2024, dated 29.02.2024.
Further, the said applicant preferred an appeal on 13.03.2024 before the First Appellate Authority i.e., the SSP(HQ). In the appeal, the appellant requested to furnish copy of the documents/information as requested in the above said RTI application. The First Appellate Authority-cum-SSP(HQ) replied stating that the reply furnished above by the PIO was found satisfactory and hence the first appeal stands disposed vide Order No.12/RTI/APPL-REPLY/SSP(HQ)/2024, dated 09.04.2024.
Against the decision of First Appellate Authority, the appellant preferred second appeal wherein the appellant requested to provide copy of documents and information. In this connection, it is submitted that except the information related to Direct Recruitment, the other information sought by the appellant were furnished under the purview of RTI Act, 2005. Whereas the information/copy of documents related to Direct Recruitment is relating to Minutes of the Selection Committee. In this regard, it is submitted that the decisions/recommendations of the Selection Committee and particulars of the candidates detailed in the minutes might be held in a fiduciary capacity and thus potentially exempted under section 8(1)(e) of RTI Act, 2005. Moreover, the appellant has not involved/related with the information requested and hence it would attract third party information in nature."
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Present through video conference.CIC/UTPON/A/2024/114091 Page 5 of 8
Respondent: Shri R Mohan Kumar, SP/ PIO present through video conference.
11. Proof of having served a copy of Second Appeals on Respondent while filing the same in CIC is not available on record. The Respondent confirmed non-service.
12. The Appellant stated that he has sought information on behalf of SC/ST candidates who applied for the post of Sub-Inspector of Police for selection against direct recruitment or on compassionate ground, however, they were not selected. He pleaded that information along with supportive documents have not been provided to him till date. In case File No. CIC/UTPON/A/2024/114188, he pleaded that partial information was wrongly denied by the PIO by invoking Section 8 (1)(e) of the RTI Act.
13. The Respondent by placing reliance on his written submissions stated that point-wise reply along with relevant permissible information has already been provided to the Appellant against each instant RTI applications. He further stated that the appellant was not one of the candidates applied for the subject post, therefore, the information sought by him being third-party's personal information attracts applicability of Section 8 (1)(j) of the RTI Act.
14. On a query from the Bench, the Appellant denied having received the copy of written submission from the Respondent. Decision:
In case File No. CIC/UTPON/A/2024/114091 and CIC/UTPON/A/2024/114188.
15. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both the parties and perusal of the records, note that as far as RTI applications are concerned appropriate replies have been given by the Respondents vide letters dated 29.02.2024 and 12.11.2025 in both the cases, which are as per the provisions of the RTI Act and are thus, upheld.
16. Moreover, the Commission agrees with the stand taken by PIO regarding during hearing regarding denial of information as it relates to the personal information of a third-party candidates, which is exempted from disclosure under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act.
17. In this regard, attention of the Appellant is also drawn towards a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the matter of Central Public Information Officer, Supreme Court of India Vs. Subhash Chandra Agarwal in Civil Appeal No. 10044 of 2010 with Civil Appeal No. 10045 of 2010 and Civil Appeal No. 2683 of 2010 decided on 13.11.2019 wherein the import of "personal information" envisaged under Section 8(1)(j) of RTI Act has been exemplified in the context of earlier ratios laid down by the same Court in the matter(s) of Canara Bank Vs. C.S. Shyam in Civil Appeal No.22 of 2009; Girish Ramchandra Deshpande vs. Central Information Commissioner & Ors., (2013) 1 CIC/UTPON/A/2024/114091 Page 6 of 8 SCC 212 and R.K. Jain vs. Union of India & Anr., (2013) 14 SCC 794.The following was thus held:
"59. Reading of the aforesaid judicial precedents, in our opinion, would indicate that personal records, including name, address, physical, mental and psychological status, marks obtained, grades and answer sheets, are all treated as personal information. Similarly, professional records, including qualification, performance, evaluation reports, ACRs, disciplinary proceedings, etc. are all personal information. Medical records, treatment, choice of medicine, list of hospitals and doctors visited, findings recorded, including that of the family members, information relating to assets, liabilities, income tax returns, details of investments, lending and borrowing, etc. are personal information. Such personal information is entitled to protection from unwarranted invasion of privacy and conditional access is available when stipulation of larger public interest is satisfied. This list is indicative and not exhaustive..."
18. Having observed as above, intervention of the Commission is not warranted in the matters and submissions of the PIO are upheld.
19. However, in the spirit of the RTI Act, the Respondent is directed to share a copy of his latest written submissions along with enclosures, free of charge with the Appellant within one week of the date of receipt of this order. Proof of service be uploaded on the CIC's portal immediately, thereafter.
The appeals are disposed of accordingly.
Vinod Kumar Tiwari (विनोद कुमार वििारी) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयुक्त) Authenticated true copy (अनिप्रमानणर् सत्यानपर् प्रनर्) (S. Anantharaman) Dy. Registrar 011- 26181927 Date CIC/UTPON/A/2024/114091 Page 7 of 8 Copy To:
The FAA, Sr. Superintendent of Police (HQ), Daman Street, Police Head Quarters, Puducherry - 605001 CIC/UTPON/A/2024/114091 Page 8 of 8 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)