Central Information Commission
Tapasya vs Ministry Of Women & Child Development on 13 January, 2026
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग,मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं या / Second Appeal No. CIC/MOWCD/A/2024/657000
Tapasya ... अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO: Ministry of Women &
Child Development, New ... ितवादीगण/Respondents
Delhi
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:
RTI : 29.08.2024 FA : 14.10.2024 SA : Nil.
CPIO : 24.09.2024 FAO : 22.11.2024 Hearing : 12.01.2026
Date of Decision: 12.01.2026
CORAM:
Hon'ble Commissioner
Shri P R Ramesh
ORDER
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 29.08.2024 seeking information on the following points:
"..Under the RTI Act, 2005, I request the following information from your public authority:
1. Please provide the complete file no WW-23/1/2021-WW with all internal and external correspondence and file notings.Page 1 of 7
2. Please provide the third-party evaluation of MOWCD women safety schemes like One Stop Centre Scheme, Women Helpline Scheme conducted by NITI Aayog in 2020-21. This study has been mentioned by the Ministry in Parliament on multiple occasions. NITI Aayog maintains that the study was submitted to MOWCD.
3. Please provide any other evaluations of women safety schemes conducted after the NITI Aayog study.
Please provide the certified digital copies as available with your public authority. If digital copies are not available, please provide certified photocopies..."
2. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 24.09.2024 and the same is reproduced as under:-
"..Please refer to your RTI Application bearing No. MOWCD/R/E/24/00984 dated 29.08.2024 and to inform that this Ministry has downloaded the electronic copy of note-sheet and correspondence on respective file and report from e-office. The total size of information spills over to approximately 1870 pages in toto.
2. For supply of such voluminous information, attention is invited to provisions contained under sub-section (9) of Section 7 of the RTI Act 2005 which is relevant to re-produce as under:
(9) An information shall ordinarily be provided in the form in which it is sought unless it would disproportionately divert the resources of the public authority or would be detrimental to the safety or preservation of the record in question.
3. In this backdrop of gigantic size of the electronic file and the time likely to be taken for certifying each copy of the note-sheet and correspondence portions of the files for the undersigned, you are requested to kindly indicate the specific note number and correspondence number or the Page 2 of 7 specified period for which the information has been sought. Such a course of action would be mutually convenient, as the same would save the applicant from paying cost of copy of note-sheets and correspondence portions as per RTI (Regulation of Fee and Cost) Rules, 2005 and the diversion of the resources of the public authority..."
3. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 14.10.2024 alleging that the information provided was incomplete, false and misleading. The FAA vide order dated 22.11.2024 upheld the reply given by the CPIO.
4. Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated Nil.
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
Appellant: Not present.
Respondent: Shri Maish Kishan, US and Shri Yashwant B, JS- participated in the hearing.
5. The Respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that the records sought by the Appellant spill over more than 1800 pages and providing such information to the Appellant would cause diversion of resources and is squarely covered by Section 7(9) of the RTI Act. A written submission dated 09.01.2026 has been received from CPIO and same has been taken on record for perusal. The relevant extract whereof is as under:
2 "..Ms. Tapasya has submitted the following before the Hon'ble Commission: That the information sought vide her RTI application dated 29.08.2024 relating to the Umbrella Scheme of Mission Shakti has not been provided to her.
Facts of the Case: -
i. The applicant preferred a second appeal/complaint before the Hon'ble Central Information Commission with reference to her RTI application dated 29.08.2024 (Annexure-1).Page 3 of 7
ii. The RTI application dated 29.08.2024 sought electronic copies of note-sheets and correspondence relating to files under the Umbrella Scheme of Mission Shakti. If digital copies are not available, certified copies photocopies were requested.
iii. The information available on the concerned e-files was downloaded from the e-Office system and the total volume of information was assessed to be approximately 1870 pages.
iv. In view of the voluminous nature of the information, attention was invited by the CPIO to the provisions of Section 7(9) of the RTI Act, 2005, which stipulate that information shall ordinarily be provided in the form in which it is sought unless doing so would disproportionately divert the resources of the public authority or be detrimental to the safety or preservation of the record.
v. Accordingly, the applicant was requested by the CPIO vide letter dated 24.09.2024 to indicate the specific note-sheet numbers, correspondence numbers or the specified period for which the information was required, as a mutually convenient course of action to avoid unnecessary diversion of public resources and to save the applicant from incurring copying charges as per the RTI (Regulation of Fee and Cost) Rules, 2005.
vi. Subsequently, the applicant preferred a first appeal dated 14.10.2024 under Section 19 of the RTI Act, 2005 before the First Appellate Authority (Annexure-II).
vii. The First Appellate Authority, vide order dated 22.11.2024, after examining the matter, observed that there was no refusal on the part of the CPIO to provide information. The CPIO had only requested specification of records in view of the voluminous nature of the information and had relied upon the extant provisions of Section 7(9) of the RTI Act, 2005 (Annexure-III). The Appellate Authority concluded that Page 4 of 7 the action taken by the CPIO was in accordance with the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 and that there was no attempt to deny information to the applicant.
viii. As the applicant did not furnish the specific note numbers, correspondence numbers or the period for which information was sought, the Ministry is still in the view that information sought may be provided to the applicant if the applicant indicates the specific note-sheet numbers, correspondence numbers or the specified period for which the information was required.
4 The above facts are respectfully submitted for kind consideration of the Hon'ble Commission.
5. As the RTI application pertains to the period of the then CPIO, Shri Lalit Grover, Under Secretary (Sambal), he is also being requested to appear before the Hon'ble Commission on the scheduled date and time. Sh. Manish Kishan, Under Secretary (Sambal) has been authorized to appear on behalf of the present CPIO before the Hon'ble Commission..."
Decision:
7. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both parties and perusal of records, observes that an appropriate response has been provided to the Appellant from their official record. It is noted that information sought pertains to voluminous records spread across multiple files and years. Furnishing copies of the entire record, as sought by the Appellant, would require extensive collation and examination of documents, which would disproportionately divert the resources of the public authority. Accordingly, the request is covered under the provisions of Section 7(9) of the RTI Act, which provides that information shall ordinarily be provided in the form sought unless doing so disproportionately divert the resources of the public authority. In view of the above, the Commission finds no infirmity in the response of the PIO.Page 5 of 7
8. Before parting with the case, Commission observes that a third-party evaluation by NITI Aayog as sought by the Appellant refers to an independent and objective assessment of government schemes and programmes, commissioned by the Government of India.
Such evaluations are undertaken to assess the design, implementation, efficiency, effectiveness, outcomes, and sustainability of public schemes, particularly those involving substantial public expenditure and social welfare objectives.
9. It is pertinent to mention that the defining feature of a third-party evaluation lies in its institutional independence from the implementing Ministry or Department, thereby ensuring neutrality, credibility, and the absence of any conflict of interest. These evaluations are evidence-based and typically involve field surveys, stakeholder consultations, data analysis, and outcome measurements against stated objectives. The findings and recommendations emanating from such evaluations are intended to facilitate informed decision-making, policy reform, mid-course correction, and improved governance.
10. In the context of social sector schemes, including women safety and empowerment programmes implemented by the Ministry of Women and Child Development, third-party evaluations conducted by NITI Aayog serve a critical public purpose by examining whether the schemes are achieving their intended objectives and whether public funds are being utilised efficiently, effectively, and in a transparent manner. The findings and recommendations emerging from such evaluations are intended to support informed decision making, policy reform, mid-course correction, and improved governance.
11. Commission is of the considered opinion that such third-party evaluation reports, particularly those assessing the implementation and effectiveness of women safety and welfare schemes funded from the public exchequer, ought to be placed in the public domain in the interest of transparency and public awareness. Disclosure of these evaluations facilitates informed public discourse, enhances accountability of public authorities, and is in furtherance of the mandate of Sections 4(1)(b) and 4(2) of the RTI Act, which emphasize proactive dissemination of information relating to public policies, programmes, and their performance. Accordingly, the Respondent public Authority is Page 6 of 7 advised to place in public domain third-party evaluation report of women safety schemes of Ministry of Women and Child Development on their official website. In doing so, the information which is exempted under Section 8 and 9 of the RTI Act shall be redacted as per provisions of the RTI Act. A copy of this order be placed before ethe competent authority for appropriate action. The Appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
(P R Ramesh) (पी. आर. रमेश)
Information Commissioner (सू चना आयु )
Authenticated true copy
Vivek Agarwal (िववेक अ वाल)
Dy. Registrar (उप पं जीयक)
011-26107048
Addresses of the parties:
1 The CPIO
Under Secretary-(Sambal) &
CPIO, Ministry of Women &
Child Development, Sambal
Division, A-Wing, R.No.-621,
Shastri Bhawan, New
Delhi-110001.
2 Tapasya
Page 7 of 7
Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
1. It is recommended to publish following information or following categories of information in compliance with section 4(2) of the RTI Act, 2005- Third-party evaluation reports, concerning woman safety and welfare schemes Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)