Central Information Commission
Deepak Sharma vs Ifci Limited (Ifci) on 3 September, 2025
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गं गनाथ माग,मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं ा / Second Appeal No. CIC/IFCIL/A/2024/650795 +
CIC/IFCIL/A/2024/647232
Deepak Sharma ... अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO: Stock Holding
Corporation of India Limited, ... ितवादीगण/Respondent
Mumbai
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal(s):
Sl. No. Second Date of Date of Date of Date of Date of
Appeal RTI CPIO's First FAA's Second
No. Application Reply Appeal Order Appeal
1. 650795 23.08.2024 05.09.2024 07.09.2024 03.10.2024 16.11.2024
2. 647232 25.08.2024 30.08.2024 03.09.2024 17.09.2024 24.10.2024
The instant set of appeals have been clubbed for decision as these relate to similar
RTI Applications and same subject matter.
Date of Hearing: 02.09.2025
Date of Decision: 02.09.2025
CORAM:
Hon'ble Commissioner
_ANANDI RAMALINGAM
ORDER
Second Appeal No. CIC/IFCIL/A/2024/650795
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 23.08.2024 seeking information on the following points:
Page 1 of 6 Every citizen does stamp duty paid for every registration of any document including notarized agreements. Every citizen has fundamental right to verify that whether proper stamp duty is paid or not in the agreement for its validity. Moreover E-stamp duty certificate issued are government documents and can be given under RTI act. My wife sonal shukla has made a lease/rent agreement having E-certificate no. IN-DL62726792822664V dated 14 February 2023 with account reference IMPACC (IV)/dl805303/DELHI/DL-DLH and used it in matrimonial dispute. So, Kindly provide information:-
1. Kindly provide the account ID, Name of account holder, addresses and contact details like mobile or phone number etc of the E-stamp vendor in NCT Delhi mentioned in account reference no. IMPACC (IV)/dl805303/DELHI/DL-DLH.
2. Kindly provide confirmation that the Lease/rent agreement for 11 months having description of document which comes under Article 35(i) Lease- Rent deed upto 1 year is a compulsorily registrable document in NCT of Delhi for stamp duty or stamp duty payment.
3. Kindly provide the contact details like phone number, address or any other details of first party of the E-stamp certificate no. IN-DL62726792822664V dated 14 February 2023 in which my wife sonal shukla is second party.
4. Kindly provide the certified true copy & attested copy of the information and its relevant documents asked above.
1.1. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 05.09.2024 and the same is reproduced as under :-
"In this context, we observe that you are neither a first party nor the second party to the E-stamp Certificate IN-DL62726792822664V. Since you are not a party to the said e-stamp certificate we are unable to provide you the requisite information/documents."
1.2. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Page 2 of 6 Appeal dated 07.09.2024 alleging that the information provided was incomplete, false and misleading. The FAA vide order dated 03.10.2024 upheld the reply given by the CPIO.
1.3. Aggrieved with the FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 16.11.2024.
Second Appeal No. CIC/IFCIL/A/2024/647232
2. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 25.08.2024 seeking information on the following points:
1. Kindly provide the contact details like phone number, address or any other details of first party Ghanshyam of the E-stamp certificate no.
INDL62726792822664V dated 14.02.2023 in which my wife sonal shukla is second party.
2. Kindly provide the certified true copy & attested copy of the information asked above.
3. Kindly send the information in physical form/hard copy to applicant by speed post.
2.1. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 30.08.2024 and the same is reproduced as under :-
"The contents of the said application suggests that the queries raised in the RTI application pertain to SHCIL/closely connected its functioning. Accordingly, we are transferring the RTI application under the provisions of Sec 6(3) of the RTI Act, 2005 for direct disposal as per law."
2.2. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 03.09.2024 alleging that the information provided was incomplete, false and misleading. The FAA vide order dated 17.09.2024 stated as under: -
Page 3 of 6"In my view the appeal does not lie against action of CPIO while transferring the application under section 6(3) of RTI Act. However, it has been informed that the application has been disposed off by SHCIL. The appeal is disposed off accordingly."
2.3. Aggrieved with the FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 24.10.2024.
3. The appellant attended the hearing through video conference and the respondent remained absent.
4. In file no. CIC/IFCIL/A/2024/650795, the appellant inter alia submitted that he had sought details of the E-stamp and contact details of a person i.e Mr. Ghanshyam with whom his wife i.e Ms. Sonal Shukla made lase/rent agreement, against which the respondent authority vide letter dated 05.09.2024, did not provide any information, stating that he was not a party to the agreement. He further submitted that the alleged agreement is a fraudulent document made by his wife, as Mr. Ghansham died in 2019, and the same was submitted by him in the pending matrimonial court case against his wife and this information is of utmost important for the investigation. He further stated that in file no. CIC/IFCIL/A/2024/647232, no reply had been furnished by the CPIO. He requested the Commission to direct the respondent to furnish the information as sought.
5. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing the appellant and perusal of records, observes that in file no. CIC/IFCIL/A/2024/650795, the CPIO has provided appropriate reply to the RTI Application vide letter dated 05.09.2024. The Commission notes that the appellant has sought for the personal information of Ms. Sonal Shukla (third party), disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest. Hence, the information sought is exempted under section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. In this regard, the attention of the appellant is drawn towards a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court 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 wherein the import of "personal information" envisaged under Section 8(1)(j) of Page 4 of 6 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 SCC 212 and R.K. Jain vs. Union of India & amp; 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..."
However, the Commission directs the CPIO to submit a written statement before the Commission, citing reasons for his/her absence during the hearing by uploading on http://dsscic.nic.in/online-link-paper-compliance/add, within 20 days from the date of the receipt of this order, under intimation to the Commission. With this observation and direction, the appeal is disposed of.
6. Further, in file no. CIC/IFCIL/A/2024/647232, the Commission further observes that the appellant has sought for the personal information of Mr. Ghanshyam (third party), which is exempted under section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, hence no relief can be given. However, the Commission issues a Show-cause notice to the CPIO, as to why action under Section 20(1) of the RTI Act should not be initiated against him/her for not responding to the RTI application within stipulated time and remained absent during Page 5 of 6 the hearing, despite hearing notices having been served upon them. Therefore, the Commission directs the CPIO to submit a written statement before the Commission, explaining citing reasons for above said conduct along with the comments of the First Appellate Authority by uploading on http://dsscic.nic.in/online-link-paper- compliance/add, within 20 days from the date of the receipt of this order. With this observation and direction, the appeal is disposed of.
Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
Sd/-
(Anandi Ramalingam) (आनंदी रामिलंगम) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) िदनांक/Date: 02.09.2025 Authenticated true copy O. P. Pokhriyal (ओ. पी. पोख रयाल) Dy. Registrar (उप पंजीयक) 011-26180514 Addresses of the parties:
1. The CPIO Stock Holding Corporation of India Limited, 301, Centre Point, Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Road, Parel, Mumbai - 400012 2 Deepak Sharma Page 6 of 6 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)