Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Mralok Srivastava vs Ministry Of Human Resource Development on 24 November, 2015

                  CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                   (Room No.315, B­Wing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi 110 066)



                   Prof. M. Sridhar Acharyulu (Madabhushi Sridhar)

                                          Information Commissioner


           Alok Srivastava v. PIO, English & Foreign Language University

                                          Important Dates and time taken:



                                          CIC/SA/A/2015/001053

     RTI: 09.04.2015                    Reply: 09.06.2015

     SA: 01.07.2015                     Hearing:11.09.2015                        Decision: 24­11­2015 

     Result:   




                                          CIC/SA/A/2015/001059

     RTI: 09.04.2015                    FAA: 14.05.2015

     SA: 01.07.2015                     Hearing:11.09.2015                        Decision: 24­11­2015

     Result:   




                                           CIC/SA/A/2015/001110

     RTI: 09.04.2015                    Reply: 11.06.2015

     SA: 13.07.2015                     Hearing:11.09.2015                        Decision: 24­11­2015

     Result:   




Parties Present:


1.      Appellant is present in the VC. Mr. Sanjay Kumar, PIO represents Public authority.
 FACTS:


2.        Appellant in his RTI applications asked following questions :


Sl. No.      Information sought                                            CPIO reply

             CIC/SA/A/2015/001053                                          Questions   will   not   be   answered;   only 
                                                                           information which is available under the 
1.           Whether the Registrar, the English and Foreign  control   of   the   Public   Authority   will   be 
             Languages University, Hyderabad has verified  provided.
             the   applicability   of   Office   Memorandum   No. 
                                                                           Information   sought

  for   pertains   to   Dr  41019/18/97­Estt (B), dated 13.06.2000, issued  Manjusha   Srivastava   and   cannot   be  by   the   Govt   of   India,   Ministry   of   Personnel,  disclosed,   being   a   third   party  Public   Grievance   &   Pension,   Department   of  information.

Personnel   &   Training,   New   Delhi,   to   EFL  University before 26.03.2012.

2. Copy   of   the   relevant   note­file,   wherein   the  Questions   will   not   be   answered;   only  applicability   of   Office   Memorandum   No.  information which is available under the  41019/18/97­Estt(B),   dated   13.06.2000,   issued  control   of   the   Public   Authority   will   be  by   the   Govt   of   India,   Ministry   of   Personnel,  provided. Public   Grievance   &   Pension,   Department   of  Information   sought   for   pertains   to   Dr  Personnel   &   Training,   New   Delhi,   to   EFL  Manjusha   Srivastava   and   cannot   be  University   has  been   verified   by  the  Registrar,  disclosed,   being   a   third   party  the English and Foreign Languages University,  information.

Hyderabad, before 26.03.2012.

CIC/SA/A/2015/001059 Questions   will   not   be   answered;   only  information which is available under the 

3. Whether the Registrar, the English and Foreign  control   of   the   Public   Authority   will   be  Languages University, Hyderabad has verified  provided. the   applicability   of   Office   Memorandum   No.  Information   sought   for   pertains   to   Dr  41019/18/97­Estt (B), dated 13.06.2000, issued  Manjusha   Srivastava   and   cannot   be  by   the   Govt   of   India,   Ministry   of   Personnel,  disclosed,   being   a   third   party  Public   Grievance   &   Pension,   Department   of  information.

Personnel   &   Training,   New   Delhi,   to   EFL  University after 26.03.2012.

4. Copy   of   the   relevant   note­file,   wherein   the  Questions   will   not   be   answered;   only  applicability   of   Office   Memorandum   No.  information which is available under the  41019/18/97­Estt(B),   dated   13.06.2000,   issued  control   of   the   Public   Authority   will   be  by   the   Govt   of   India,   Ministry   of   Personnel,  provided. Public   Grievance   &   Pension,   Department   of  Personnel   &   Training,   New   Delhi,   to   EFL  Information   sought   for   pertains   to   Dr  University   has  been   verified   by  the  Registrar,  Manjusha   Srivastava   and   cannot   be  the English and Foreign Languages University,  disclosed,   being   a   third   party  Hyderabad, after 26.03.2012. information.

CIC/SA/A/2015/001110 Information about Manjusha Srivastava,  denied under section 8(1)(j) of the Act.

5. Copy of the relevant note file wherein letter No.  EFLU/RTI/PIO/1756,   dated   27.02.2012,   of   the  Nodal Officer, the English Foreign Languages  University, Hyderabad, addressed to the Govt  of   the   India,   Ministry   of   Personnel,   Public  Grievance   &   Pension,   Department   of  Personnel   &   Training,   New   Delhi,   has   been  approved   by   the   Vice­Chancellor,   EFL  University, Hyderabad.

6. Copy   of   the   RTI   application   which   has   been  Information about Manjusha Srivastava,  referred to as "RTI Query which has arisen in  denied under section 8(1)(j) of the Act. the recent past" at para 1 of page 1 of the letter  No. EFLU/RTI/PIO/ 1756, dated 27.02.2012, of  the   Nodal   Officer,   the   English   and   Foreign  Languages University, Hyderabad.

3.     Being unsatisfied with the CPIO reply, appellant filed first appeal in these cases and  thereafter approached the Commission.

Proceedings Before the Commission:

4.     Multiple applications on the same subject matter against some public authorities by the  same appellant at different point of time reflects unfair attitude of the appellant, which will  chucked the system of all the public authority. Nobody knows how many RTI was filed by this  appellant.   He  cannot   harass  the  public   authority   like  this.   Some  of   the  questions   are  just  demanding questions, which was simply because of his wife who was not selected. Appellant  being an educated and responsible government officer should not have done like this and  should have refrained from this kind of activities. The letter of law has to be read with the spirit  on object of law. The simple question of same subject on different point of time will result in  unending, uncertain harassment. Most of the information sought by him does not help him in  pursuing   his   legal   rights,   challenging   the   non­selection   of   his   wife.   His   numbers   of   RTI  application had also shown that appellant want to put undue pressure on the public authority to  select his wife which the Commission cannot expect. If he feels that his wife is aggrieved, he  understood that she has every right to pursue it for appropriate remedy, which the appellant is  already doing.

5. The Commission finds that appellant has refused to answer certain questions to the  Commission as to how the public interest is inevitable. The Commission is to inform that there  is   private   vengeance   against   most   of   the   RTI   applications.   The   appellant   has   voluntarily  submitted to the Commission that he had copy of the legal opinion and he does not want that  and he also agreed that information under section 8 (1) (a) can be refused, restated as under:

" (a) information, disclosure of which would prejudicially affect the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security, strategic, scientific or economic interests of the State, relation with foreign State or lead to incitement of an offence;"

6. The Commission advises him not to ask inquiry question and clarification questions  under RTI Act. The Commission explains him how his multiple RTI applications have chucked  the public authority and CIC. The Commission advises him to behave in a responsible manner  like senior government officer which is expected from a retired senior government officer and  allow   the   public   authority   to   function.   Do   not   put   public   authority   under   pressure   of  unnecessary information, litigation like this.

7. PIO of respondent authority argued that it was their party information, as information  sought is about Dr. Manjusha Srivastava. The Commission asked PIO whether they obtained  her view, if she is third party, PIO said 'no'. On the direction of the Commission Dr. Manjusha  Srivastava was contacted over mobile phone and she expressed and declared that she has no  objection to disclose the information sought by her husband about her.

8. Secondly, the PIO contended that most of the points of the information sought are  going to be used by the appellant against public authority and hence in the interest of public  authority  it   cannot   be  given.   The  Commission  explained  him  that   there  is   no  provision  to  validate this contention.   In RTI question, information for standing council and expenditure  involved, copy of appointment of standing council and information about fee/remuneration paid  shall be disclosed. Legal opinion also can be given.

9.    Having heard the submission and perusal of records, Commission directs the respondent  authority  to  provide  the  information  sought   by   appellant   as   Dr.   Manjusha  Srivastava,   third  party, raised no objection on it, within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order. Appeal is  disposed of accordingly.

(M. Sridhar Acharyulu) Information Commissioner  Authenticated true copy (Babu Lal) Deputy Registrar Addresses of the parties:

1. The CPIO under RTI, English & Foreign Language University, Osmania University Campus, Tarnaka, Secunderabad­500007.
2. Shri Ashok Srivastava, 115, Prashasan Nagar, Road No. 72, Jubilee Hills, P.O. Film Nagar, Hyderabad­500096.