Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

Suresh Sharma vs Central Reserve Police Force on 15 April, 2024

Author: Heeralal Samariya

Bench: Heeralal Samariya

                                के न्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
                       Central Information Commission
                            बाबा गंगनाथ मागग, मुननरका
                       Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                        नई दिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067

नितीय अपील संख्या / Second Appeal No. CIC/CRPFO/A/2023/613779

Shri SURESH SHARMA                                         ... अपीलकताग/Appellant
                                VERSUS/बनाम

PIO,                                                   ...प्रनतवािीगण /Respondent
Central Reserve Police Force

Date of Hearing                      :   12.04.2024
Date of Decision                     :   12.04.2024
Chief Information Commissioner       :   Shri Heeralal Samariya

Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on          :       19.09.2022
PIO replied on                    :       27.10.2022
First Appeal filed on             :       25.11.2022
First Appellate Order on          :       30.12.2022
2 Appeal/complaint received on
 nd                               :       28.02.2022

Information sought

and background of the case:

The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 19.09.2022 seeking information on following points:-

"a. Copy of the joining letter in the CRPF.

b. Copy of date of joining and completion of Radio Operator Basic Course. c. Date of remustering order and date as on remustered as Head Constable Radio Operator in CRPF.

d. Whether they are suffered from colour blindness and date of diagnosed of colour blindness.

e. Whether there is any position/designation as Constable Radio Operator in the Signal Wing of CRPF after completion of Radio Operator Basic Course. f. Whether they work as Constable Radio Operator after their Radio Operator Basic Course in CRPF Signal Wing and for what time they work as Constable Radio Operator.

g. The information pertaining to the intermediate period of completion of Radio Operator Basic Course and remustering in the Signal Wing, served by Ravi Kumar and Kapil Kumar.

h. Provide the copy of complete remustering rules. i. Provide the details and number of Colour blind CRPF employees working at present."

The CPIO, Central Reserve Police Force, Kolkata vide letter dated 27.10.2022 replied as under:-

"2. उक्त संदर्भित आवेदन पत्र के माध्यम से आपके द्वारा सूचना के अर्िकार के तहत बल संख्या 045072561 हवलदार/आर.ओ रवव कुमार एवं बल संख्या 031360542 हव/आर.ओ कवपल कुमार का सेवा से संबंर्ित सूचना/दस्तावेज मॉगी गई थी। उक्त संदभि में आपको सूर्चत ककया जाता है कक सूचना के अर्िकार अर्ि र्नयम-2005 के िारा 11 (1) के अनुसार ककसी व्यवक्त की व्यवक्तगत जानकारी को प्रकट करने से पहले संबंर्ित व्यवक्त से मौखिक /र्लखित रूप में इस संबंि में अनुमर्त लेना आवश्यक होता है । कार्मिकों ने स्वयं से संबंर्ित कोई भी व्यवक्तगत जानकारी आपको दे ने हे तु अपनी अर्नच्छुकता / असहमर्त जताई है । अतः आपके द्वारा मॉगी गई सूचना आपको उपलब्ि नहीं कराई जा सकती है ।"

Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 25.11.2022. The FAA vide order dated 30.12.2022 stated as under:-

2. "उपयुक्त ि मामले में आपको सूर्चत ककया जाता है कक सूचना अर्िकार अर्िर्नयम-2005 के सेक्शन 2(n), 11 (1) एवं 24 (1) में र्नकहत प्राविानों के अन्तगित मांगी गयी वांर्छत सूचना मुहैया नहीं कराई जा सकती है ।"

Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.

Written submission dated 05.042024 has been received from the CPIO and same has been taken on record for perusal.

Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:

Appellant: Present through video-conferencing.

Respondent: Mr. Rajesh Kumar Sahai, DIGP The Appellant stated that the relevant information has not been furnished to him till date. He further stated that the relevant information has been wrongly denied under the garb of personal information of third party. He requested to direct the PIO to furnish information as sought in the instant RTI Application.

The Respondent reiterated the contents of their written submission and stated that the information sought by the Appellant could not be furnished by the organisation since they were an exempt organisation by virtue of Section 24 read with 2nd Schedule of the RTI Act, 2005.

Decision:

Upon perusal of records of the case and submissions made during the hearing it is evident that the Respondent had sent an appropriate reply in terms of the Page 2 of 3 provision of the RTI Act. Commission observes that the CRPF is an organisation specified under the Second Schedule of the RTI Act and, accordingly, under Section 24 of the RTI Act, the CRPF is exempt from the rigours of the RTI Act. Commission notes that there is no material on record to show that there was any corruption or violation of human rights so as to bring the case of the Appellant within the ambit of the Proviso to Section 24 of the RTI Act. Furthermore, the Appellant has sought personal information of third-party which is exempted from disclosure under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, since its disclosure would cause unnecessary invasion of privacy of an individual. In the given circumstances, no further intervention of the Commission is warranted in this case under the RTI Act.

Appeal is disposed accordingly.

Heeralal Samariya (हीरालाल सामररया) Chief Information Commissioner (मुख्य सूचना आयुक्त) Authenticated true copy (अनिप्रमानणत सत्यानपत प्रनत) S. K. Chitkara (एस. के . नचटकारा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26186535 Page 3 of 3 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-

Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)