Central Information Commission
Deepak vs Directorate Of Education on 11 September, 2024
केन्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ मागग, मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई निल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
File Nos. : CIC/GNCTD/C/2023/125274 and
CIC/DIRED/A/2023/627890
Deepak ....निकायतकताग /Complainant
Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
PIO,
Hira Lal Jain Senior Secondary School,
Sadar Bazar, Delhi - 110006.
PIO,
Office of the Deputy Director of Education,
Zone-08, District North, Lucknow Road,
Delhi - 110054 ....प्रनतवािीगण /Respondents
Date of Hearing : 05.09.2024
Date of Decision : 10.09.2024
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari
The above-mentioned Appeal and Complaint have been clubbed together for
decision as these are based on similar RTI Applications, hence are being
disposed of through a common order.
Relevant facts emerging from complaint:
RTI application filed on : 15.02.2023
CPIO replied on : 27.02.2023, 21.04.2023
First appeal filed on : 12.04.2023
First Appellate Authority's order : 11.05.2023
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : Nil
Page 1 of 8
CIC/GNCTD/C/2023/125274
Information sought:
The Complainant filed an RTI application dated 15.02.2023 seeking the following information:
01- Please provide the copy of file including file noting pages related to the DPC/Staff Selection committee held w.e.f. 01.01.2014 to 31.12.2017 in Hira Lal Senior Secondary School (Government Aided) school id-1208127, district- North Delhi, Zone-08 NOTE:- Office records can not be 3rd party information when the employee/person had drawn their salary/money from the public exchequers/government.
02- If agreed with question no.1 Please provide the photo copy of Academic Qualifications/Education Qualification of selected candidate. 03- Please provide DDO Code and PAO details of Hira Lal Senior Secondary School (Government Aided) school id-1208127, district-North Delhi, Zone-08
04- Please provide the Name and official mail/Speed post address of FAA (First Appellant Authority) for submitting 1st Appeal if I am not satisfy with your answer.
05- Please provide photocopy of Attendance Register of January, 2023 of all teachers working in Hira Lal Senior Secondary School (Government Aided) school id- 1208127, district- North Delhi, Zone-08.
Note- All HOS/Principal/Chairman are PIO to provide the information as per their official record. The PIO/HOS/Chairman are competent to use the rule position of the RTI act. As regard to confidentiality of Attendance register it is stated that the Attendance Register is the record based on which many teachers appointed on genuine record or fake record have drawn their salary from the public exchequers, therefore the same can not be confidential record for which the HOS/Principal/Chairman/PIO needs permission of the higher authorities, hence, you are requested to direct the PIO/HOS/PRINCIPAL/CHAIRMAN to provide information sorted by the appellant.
It is also submitted that The cost of photocopies of Attendance register and photocopies asked in Question no 1 will be pay or submitted by the appellant. Please provide soft copy of the information on my Gmail id- [email protected] The CPIO furnished a reply to the Complainant on 21.04.2023 stating as under:
Page 2 of 8With reference to the DDE Zone VIII g-mail dated 01.03.2023 and 21.04.2023, please find below the requisite information under RTI ACT- 2005 ID-1594 (60647)
01. The information related to the third party of the RTI Act 8 (1) (j).
02. The information related to the third party of the RTI Act 8 (1) (j).
3. The information related to the third party of the RTI Act 8 (1) (j).
04. The information related to the third party of the RTI Act 8 (1) (j).
05. The information related to the third party of the RTI Act 8 (1) (j).
Being dissatisfied, the complainant filed a First Appeal dated 12.04.2023. The FAA vide its order dated 11.05.2023, held as under.
I have gone through the appeal filed, the RTI application and the reply of the PIO (Zone- 08). It is seen that the matter pertains to PIO Hira Lal Jain Sr. Sec. School, Sadar Bazaar, Delh, a Govt. Aided School having independent PIO and FAA. Accordingly, the PIO (zone-08) transferred the said RTI application to concerned Public Authority l.e. Hira Lal Jain Sr. Sec. School, Sadar Bazaar, Delh.
As the FAA in the instant case Is Chairman/Manager of the school. The appellant may consider filing the appeal before the FAA of the concerned school. Appeal is disposed off.
CIC/DIRED/A/2023/627890 Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 15.02.2023 seeking the following information:
01- Please provide the copy of file including file noting pages related to the DPC/Staff Selection committee held w.e.f. 01.01.2014 to 31.12.2017 in Hira Lal Senior Secondary School (Government Aided) school id-1208127, district- North Delhi, Zone-08 NOTE:- Office records can not be 3rd party information when the employee/person had drawn their salary/money from the public exchequers/government.
02- If agreed with question no.1 Please provide the photo copy of Academic Qualifications/Education Qualification of selected candidate. 03- Please provide DDO Code and PAO details of Hira Lal Senior Secondary School (Government Aided) school id-1208127, district-North Delhi, Zone-08 Page 3 of 8
04- Please provide the Name and official mail/Speed post address of FAA (First Appellant Authority) for submitting 1st Appeal if I am not satisfy with your answer.
05- Please provide photocopy of Attendance Register of January, 2023 of all teachers working in Hira Lal Senior Secondary School (Government Aided) school id- 1208127, district- North Delhi, Zone-08.
Note- All HOS/Principal/Chairman are PIO to provide the information as per their official record. The PIO/HOS/Chairman are competent to use the rule position of the RTI act. As regard to confidentiality of Attendance register it is stated that the Attendance Register is the record based on which many teachers appointed on genuine recordor fake record have drawn their salary from the public exchequers, therefore the same can not be confidential record for which the HOS/Principal/Chairman/PIO needs permission of the higher authorities, hence, you are requested to direct the PIO/HOS/PRINCIPAL/CHAIRMAN to provide information sorted by the appellant.
It is also submitted that The cost of photocopies of Attendance register and photocopies asked in Question no 1 will be pay or submitted by the appellant. Please provide soft copy of the information on my Gmail id- [email protected] Having not received any response from the CPIO, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 12.04.2023. The FAA vide its order dated 11.05.2023, held as under.
I have gone through the appeal filed, the RTI application and the reply of the PIO (Zone- 08). It is seen that the matter pertains to PIO Hira Lal Jain Sr. Sec. School, Sadar Bazaar, Delhi, a Govt. Aided School having independent PIO and FAA. Accordingly, the PIO (zone-08) transferred the said RTI application to concerned Public Authority l.e. Hira Lal Jain Sr. Sec. School, Sadar Bazaar, Delhi.
As the FAA in the instant case Is Chairman/Manager of the school. The appellant may consider filing the appeal before the FAA of the concerned school. Appeal is disposed off.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, complainant/appellant approached the Commission with the instant Complaint/appeal.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Complainant/Appellant: Not Present.Page 4 of 8
Respondent: Dr. Nirmal Kumar Jain, Principal & PIO and Shri Ramdev, Vice- Principal present in person.
Written submissions of the Respondent are taken on record.
The Respondent submitted that vide their letter dated 21.04.2023, they have categorically informed the Appellant/Complainant that the information sought by him is personal information of third party, which is exempted from disclosure under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. Upon being queried by the Commission, the Respondent submitted that Appellant/Complainant is not their employee.
Decision:
The Commission based on a perusal of the facts on record observes that the core contention raised by the Complainant/Appellant in the instant Complaint/Appeal was non-receipt of information from the Respondent. In this regard, it was noted that factual position in the matter has already been informed to the Appellant/Complainant.
The Commission observes that the Appellant/Complainant had asked information which is related to personal information of third party and is exempted from disclosure under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. Further, the Complainant has not disclosed any larger public interest in disclosing the information.
The same can be garnered from a bare perusal of the text of Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act as under:
"8. Exemption from disclosure of information.--
(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, xxxx
(j) information which relates 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 Page 5 of 8 the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information;.."
In this regard, attention of the Appellant is also drawn towards a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India 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 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 & 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..."
Now, being a Complaint under Section 18 of the RTI Act, the facts of the case do not warrant any action under Section 18(2) of the RTI Act against the CPIO as it does not bear any mala fides or an intention to deliberately obstruct the access to information as alleged by the Complainant. Here, it is relevant to quote a judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the matter of Registrar of Companies & Ors v. Dharmendra Kumar Garg & Anr. [W.P.(C) 11271/2009] dated 01.06.2012 wherein it was held:
Page 6 of 8" 61. It can happen that the PIO may genuinely and bonafidely entertain the belief and hold the view that the information sought by the querist cannot be provided for one or the other reasons. Merely because the CIC eventually finds that the view taken by the PIO was not correct, it cannot automatically lead to issuance of a show cause notice under Section 20 of the RTI Act and the imposition of penalty. The legislature has cautiously provided that only in cases of malafides or unreasonable conduct, i.e., where the PIO, without reasonable cause refuses to receive the application, or provide the information, or knowingly gives incorrect, incomplete or misleading information or destroys the information, that the personal penalty on the PIO can be imposed...."
No relief can be granted in the matter.
The above-mentioned second appeal and complaint are disposed of accordingly.
Vinod Kumar Tiwari (विनोद कुमार वििारी) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयुक्त) Authenticated true copy (अनिप्रमानणत सत्यानित प्रनत) (S. Anantharaman) Dy. Registrar 011- 26181927 Date Copy To:
The FAA, Office of the Deputy Director of Education, Zone-08, District North, Lucknow Road, Delhi - 110054.Page 7 of 8
The FAA, Office of the Deputy Director of Education, Zone-08, District North, Lucknow Road, Delhi - 110054.Page 8 of 8
Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)