Central Information Commission
Ajay Bisnoi vs Ut Of Chandigarh on 4 March, 2025
केन्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ मागग, मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई निल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
File No: CIC/UTOCH/A/2023/143766
Ajay Bisnoi .....अपीलकर्ाग /Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
PIO,
Municipal Corporation of Chandigarh,
Establishment Branch, Sector 17-E,
Chandigarh - 160017 ....प्रनर्वािीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 28.02.2025
Date of Decision : 04.03.2025
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 06.04.2023
CPIO replied on : 04.05.2023
First appeal filed on : 08.05.2023
First Appellate Authority's order : 26.06.2023
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 01.11.2023
Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI application (offline) dated 06.04.2023 seeking the following information:
"I want to take information of 48 drivers selected by your office in the recruitment drive of all the documents.
1. OMR sheets with question paper
2. 48 candidates selected by your office exam hall videography
3. Selected 48 candidates driving tests videography Page 1 of 5
4. Caste certificate, Driving License, Experience certificate & Police verification report of 48 candidates."
The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 04.05.2023 stating as under:
"The requisite information pertaining to point no. 3 & 4 cannot be supplied as Third party information under RTI Act 2005."
Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 08.05.2023. The FAA vide its order dated 26.06.2023, held as under.
"On 14.06.2023, the Appellant and the Respondent appeared on the scheduled date/time. The Superintendent RTI was also present. During the course of hearing, the case was discussed in detail, wherein it has been found that the Appellant has sought information in respect of 48 drivers selected by M.C. The Respondent informed that vido letters dated 25.04.2023, the Establishment Branch transferred the RTI application to Chief Coordinator (UIAMS). Panjab University, Chandigarh and CPIO/Superintendent, Fire & Emergency Services. 1 M.C., Chandigarh under Section 6 (3) of RTI Act 2005 with the request to supply the requisite information directly to applicant, which points concerning with them. 1 Further, vide Memo No 2036 dated 08.05.2023, the CPIO of Fire & Emergency Services has replied to Appellant that the requisite information in respect of Point No.3 & 4 cannot be supplied, as third party information under RTI Act 2005.
Vide Ref No. UIAMS/Ex 7397 dated 24.05.2023, the O/o Chief Coordinator (UIAMS), Panjab University, Chandigarh has intimated to the Appellant that the requisite information in respect of Point No.1 & 2 are personal in nature and relates to 3rd party. therefore, the same cannot be provided under Section 8 (d) & (g) of RTI Act 2005. The arguments were heard in detail and the Appellant has requested to Jply the requisite information in respect of his RTI application dated 06.04.2023. The Respondent informed that the information sought by the Appellant pertains to third party information; hence, the same cannot be supplied to him.
After hearing both the parties, the Respondent is directed to re-examine the case and supply the requisite information to the Appellant under the provisions of RTI Act 2005.
Accordingly, the appeal is disposed off."Page 2 of 5
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Absent.
Respondent: Smt. Neelam Devi, APIO-cum-Superintendent, attended the hearing through VC.
The Appellant did not participate in the hearing.
The Respondent submitted that the information sought in the instant RTI Application is personal information of third party and accordingly the CPIO has denied its disclosure to the Appellant under Section 8 (1) (j) of the RTI Act. She added that the Appellant was also a candidate in the averred examination and is discontented due his non-selection.
The Commission interjected and asked the Respondent that whether any compliance was made with the directions passed by the FAA to re-examine the case and supply of the information, the Respondent submitted that since the information pertains to personal information of third party, no compliance in respect of the direction passed by the FAA was made.
Decision:
The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case and perusal of the records, observes that the initial reply provided by the CPIO vide letter dated 04.05.2023 was appropriate and the Commission upholds the same. It is surprising to note that FAA did not apply his mind independently and has merely endorsed a cyclostyled order wherein direction was given to CPIO to provide exempted information to the Appellant and accordingly, the FAA order dated 26.06.2023 is set aside. In this regard, the Commission notes that Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CPIO, Supreme Court of India v. Subhash Chandra Agrawal Civil Appeal No. 10044 of 2010 held as under:
"59...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, Page 3 of 5 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....."
The above ratio is applicable to this case as well. Hence, no intervention of the Commission is required in the instant case. A copy of this order is marked to Mayor, MCD, Chandigarh, to take note of the aberration of RTI Act being manifested in the Respondent public authority's office. She is advised to arrange training workshops etc. on the subject matter of the RTI Act for sensitizing the officials in general and those dealing with the RTI matters in particular and putting in place a coherent system of checks and balances.
The appeal is 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 Page 4 of 5 Copy To:
Mayor, Municipal Corporation of Chandigarh, Additional Deluxe Building, New Jan Marg, Sector 17, Chandigarh, 160017 The FAA Addl. Commissioner-I, Municipal Corporation of Chandigarh, Sector 17-E, Chandigarh - 160017 Page 5 of 5 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)