Central Information Commission
Smt. R. Amirtham vs Department Of Telecommunications on 13 January, 2026
के ीय सू चना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
File No: CIC/DOTEL/A/2024/141031
R. AMIRTHAM .....अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO
M/o. COMMUNICATIONS AND
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY,
DEPARTMENT OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS, O/o. THE
PRINCIPAL CONTROLLER OF
COMMUNICATION ACCOUNTS
TAMILNADU CIRCLE, Jt. CCA
(ADMIN & CPIO, CHENNAI,
TAMILNADU-600028 .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 12.01.2026
Date of Decision : 12.01.2026
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Jaya Varma Sinha
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 18.06.2024
CPIO replied on : 04.07.2024
First appeal filed on : 08.07.2024
First Appellate Authority's order : 31.07.2024
2nd Appeal dated : 23.12.2024
Information sought:
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 18.06.2024 (offline) seeking the following information:Page 1 of 5
"I am residing at the above address. My husband P.Ramalingam S/O Perumal, HR No; 198212315, Pay code: 1159, as TTA, Erode Circle, Mulanoor, retired on 30.06.2008 and he is currently receiving pension through his office. I am asking information related to my husband and I am his legal wife. I send a letter on 03.08.2023 to knowing the salary details about my husband. I received a reply letter on 30.08.2023 from his office on No.Fr. CCA/TN Admn/RTI/Es office/2022-23 Dt. 14.11.2022. But the received letter was not satisfied. You have said that the first party has consented to provide the information. I would like to inform you that the same case "Sanju Gupta" and his wife case The Central Information Commission was referred to grand the all details to his wife without permission of her husband and finally she got justice. So kindly consider my application and do the need full. I hereby give the following information regarding my husband.
In this regard, provide the information:-
i) How much cross pension he is receiving at currently.
ii) Give full details of total amount received by him as pensionary benefit."
2. The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 04.07.2024 stating as under:
"Point No.(i) & (ii):-Information pertains to third party. Also, no public interest is established. Hence, the same could not be disclosed under section 8 (1) (j) of RTI Act 2005"
3. Being dissatisfied, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 08.07.2024. The FAA vide its order dated 31.07.2024 upheld the reply of CPIO."
4. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Ms. R. Amirtham along with her representative Mr. V. Dinesh, participated in the hearing through VC.
Respondent: Ms. Gowthami Balashri, CPIO-cum-Joint Controller, attended the hearing through VC.Page 2 of 5
5. The representative of the Appellant stated that the Respondent has not provided the relevant information as sought in the instant RTI Application.
6. The Respondent submitted that the Appellant in the instant RTI Application is seeking personal information of her estranged husband Shri P Ramalingam. She added that as per the records of her estranged husband available in the office, Appellant's name as a nominee is not mentioned. Therefore, the information is exempted from disclosure under Section 8 (1) (j) of the RTI Act.
7. A written submission has been received from Ms. Gowthami Balashri, CPIO-cum-Joint Controller, vide letter dated 09.01.2026, a copy of which has been sent to the Appellant and the same has been taken on record. The relevant extract of the same is as under:
"Shri P Ramalingam Retd TTA, from O/o BSNL Erode retired on superannuation on 30.06.2008. At the time of retirement, the pensioner has submitted FORM-3 stating that Smt. Amirtham Age 54 is judicially separated wife, case being filed for divorce. The same has been duly attested by SDE BSNL Mulanoor. Hence family pension was not authorized in his PPO. This office received RTI application dated 03.10.2022 submitted to BSNL Erode by the applicant transferred to this office for furnishing reply. The reply sent to the applicant vide letter dated 14.11.2022. (Copy enclosed) as Annexure -I Smt. Amirtham filed another RTI vide her application dated 14.02.2023. The RTI reply furnished on 09.03.2023. (Copy enclosed) as Annexure-II. Smt.Amirtham filed another RTI vide her application dated 18.06.2024. The RTI reply furnished on 04.07.2024. (Copy enclosed). The Inputs have been furnished stating that applicant has sought for information pertaining to third party (Shri P Ramalingam who is judicially separated husband as per information noted in this pension file and no family pension was authorized in PPO of Shri P Ramalingam who retired on 30.06.2008). Hence before disclosing such Third Party information, the concurrence or otherwise in writing of the third party concerned regarding disclosure of information relating to him is to be obtained as prescribed under Sec 11 of RTI Act 2005. Address of Shri P Ramalingam as per his pension file is No.1/1/Pallapalayam PO Karur-639002. Unwillingness for Page 3 of 5 sharing important data of P Ramalingam vide his application dated 28.06.2024 is enclosed herewith The copy of the notice dated 24.12.2025 received from Central Information Commission is also intimated to the Third Party. Shri P Ramalingam vide this office letter dated 05.01.2026. Shri P Ramalingam once again submitted his unwillingness on 05.01.2026 As per Rule 11 of RTI Act 2005- Third party information. (1) Where a Central Public Information Officer or a State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, intends to disclose any information or record, or part thereof on a request made under this Act, which relates to or has been supplied by a third party and has been treated as confidential by that third party, the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, shall, within five days from the receipt of the request, give a written notice to such third party of the request and of the fact that the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, intends to disclose the information or record, or part thereof, and invite the third party to make a submission in writing or orally, regarding whether the information should be disclosed, and such submission of the third party shall be kept in view while taking a decision about disclosure of information.
In regard to the above question, Commission referred to the Delhi High Court Decision in Vijay Prakash V. UOI 2009 SCC Online DEL 1731 wherein it was clarified that in a private dispute between husband and wife, the basic protection afforded by virtue of exemption from disclosure enacted under SECTION 8(1) (j) cannot be lifted or disturbed unless the petitioner is able to justify how such disclosure wild be in Public Interest. Under section 8(1) (j) information which has been exempted is defined as:
"information which related to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the CPIO or the SPIO or the appellate authority as the case may be is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information."
Decision:
8. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case and perusal of the records, observes that the PIO has furnished appropriate reply, applying the relevant provision of RTI Act to deny third Page 4 of 5 party information. Considering the fact that there is no infirmity in the reply sent by the Respondent, no cause of action subsists in this case under the RTI Act for further adjudication.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Jaya Varma Sinha (जया वमा िस ा) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स!ािपत ित) (Ashutosh Vasishta) Dy. Registrar 011- 26160943 Copy To:
The FAA, M/o. COMMUNICATIONS AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY, DEPARTMENT OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS, O/0. THE PRINCIPAL CONTROLLER OF COMMUNICATION ACCOUNTS TAMILNADU CIRCLE, CCA, CHENNAI, TAMILNADU-600028 Page 5 of 5 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)