Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

Jawaharlal Sethia vs Khadi & Village Industries Commission on 11 May, 2026

                              के ीय सूचना आयोग
                       Central Information Commission
                           बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
                        Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                        नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067


File No: CIC/KVICO/A/2025/113367

JAWAHARLAL SETHIA                                       .....अपीलकता/Appellant

                                        VERSUS
                                         बनाम


THE CPIO
KHADI & VILLAGE INDUSTRIES COMMISSION,
RTI CELL, 3, GRAMODAYA, IRLA ROAD,
VILE PARLE-WEST,
MUMBAI-400056                                         .... ितवादीगण /Respondent

Date of Hearing                     :    29.04.2026
Date of Decision                    :    29.04.2026

INFORMATION COMMISSIONER :               Sudha Rani Relangi

Relevant facts emerging from appeal:

RTI application filed on            :    11.01.2025
CPIO replied on                     :    27.01.2025
First appeal filed on               :    22.02.2025
First Appellate Authority's order   :    11.03.2025
2nd Appeal dated                    :    15.04.2025

Information sought

:

1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 11.01.2025 seeking the following information:

"1. लेखा िनदेशक के सीबीसी फड़ के तहत एक मु त िनपटान और ऋण माफ योजना के स बंध म दए नोट के आधार पर आयोग क मी टंग सं या 599 दनांक 29.03.12 एजेड़ा नं. 14.1 म िलए िनणय एवं लेखा िनदेशक के नोट क मािणत ित उपल ध करवायी जावे।

2. आयोग के िनणय मी टंग सं या 592nd दनांक 29.04.2011 के अनुसार इं िडयन इ स टट युट ऑफ ब कग ए ड फाइने स (IIBF) दनांक 21.05.2011 ारा ग ठत कमेटी क रप ट एवं (IIBF) क रपोट क मािणत ित उपल ध करवायी जावे।

3. खादी ामोधोग आयोग क मी टंग नं. 599th दनांक 29.03.2012 क िनणयानुसार मु य कायकारी अिधकारी ारा सिचव एवं माननीय अ य आयोग ारा माननीय मं ी (एम.ए.स.एम.ई) को िलखे प क मािणत ित उपल ध करवायी जावे।

4. मु य कायकारी महोदय एवं माननीय अ य आयोग ारा भेजे उ प पर एमएसएमई मं ालय ारा क गई कायवाही क मािणत ित उपल ध करवायी जाव।

5. खादी सं था को ऋण मु करने हेतु खादी ामोधोग आयोग ारा क गई सम त कायवाही क स पूण प ावली एवं कायालय नोटशीट क मािणत ित उपल ध करवायी जावे।"

2. The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 27.01.2025 stating as under:

" Points No. 1 to 5: The contains personal financial details of a third party and does not relate to any public activity or interest. Disclosure would cause requested information an unwarranted invasion of privacy and is therefore exempt under Section 8(1) (j) of the RTI, Act-2005."

3. Aggrieved by the decision of the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 22.02.2025. The FAA vide its order dated 11.03.2025, upheld the reply of the CPIO.

4. Challenging the FAA's order, Appellant is before the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.

Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:

The following were present:-

Appellant: Not present.

Respondent: Ms. Pranita Rahul Tamahane, Director/ CPIO present through video conference.

5. The Appellant did not turn up for hearing in the NIC studio, therefore, efforts were made to connect the Appellant on audio-call, however, there was no response from the Appellant's side. Instead of prolonging the matter further, the Commission finds it viable to decide this Appeal on merits based on strength of materials placed on record.

6. Written statement of the CPIO dated 17.04.2026 is taken on record.

7. CPIO while defending this Appeal stated that a reply has been provided to the Appellant earlier and also now with the written statement. CPIO stated that Appellant is neither the employee of Respondent organization nor the intended beneficiary of loan wavier scheme for which he has sought information, therefore, internal correspondence and other related Committee reports as sought by the Appellant pertains to personal information of third party which is exempted from disclosure under Section 8 (1)(j) of the RTI Act, 2005.

Decision:

8. The Commission, after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing the CPIO and perusal of the records observed that as far as RTI application in question is concerned, it is found that suitable reply in terms of the RTI Act, 2005 was provided to the Appellant earlier vide letter dated 27.01.2025 and now vide written submission dated 17.04.2026. The Respondent/CPIO has stated that a copy of written submission has already been provided to the Appellant, therefore, the Appellant did not appear before the Commission during hearing to contest his case and no written submission to controvert the version has been filed.

9. Further, the Commission agrees with the stand taken by the CPIO in denying the information such as noting sheet, internal correspondence, Committee report and other related information pertaining to the loan waiver scheme for intended beneficiary under Section 8 (1)(j) of the RTI Act, 2005 as it involves personal information of third parties where appellant has no nexus in the matter. The Commission relied on a judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case titled Girish Ramchandra Deshpande v. Central Information Commissioner & Ors. (SLP (Civil) No. 27734 of 2012) decided on 03.10.2012. Moreover, Section 44 (3) of Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act 2023 brought into force w.e.f. 14.11.2025 establishes that Public Authority no longer requires to justify withholding personal data by weighing Public interest against privacy.

10. Accordingly, intervention of the Commission is not warranted in the matter in the absence of any contest by the Appellant after receiving the response from the CPIO as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005.

The Appeal is disposed of accordingly.

Sd/-

Sudha Rani Relangi(सुधा रानी रे लग ं ी) Information Commissioner (सूचनाआयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणतस यािपत ित) (Anil Kumar Mehta) Dy. Registrar 011- 26767500 Date Shri JAWAHARLAL SETHIA Page 4 of 4 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-

Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)