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 2, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Mr.M.Kaliaperumal vs Dept. Of Post, Gudur on 1 May, 2009

             Central Information Commission
                                                             CIC/AD/A/09/00413
                                                               Dated May 1, 2009

Name of the Applicant                  :    Mr.M.Kaliaperumal

Name of the Public Authority           :    Dept. of Post, Gudur


Background

1. The Applicant filed an RTI application dt.25.4.08 with the CPIO, DoP, Gudur.

He stated that one Mr.Ramachandra Rao was liable to pay decree amount passed in OS No.764/97 by the City Civil Court and transmitted the decree to Gudur Sub-Court on Jan.04 and that Mr.Ramachandra Rao has committed forgery in production of promissory note in OS No.86/2000 dt.23.8.04 decided by the Sub-Court. He wanted the postal address of Mr.Ramachandra Rao to initiate further legal action. He also stated that CPIO should invoke Sec.11 of the RTIA to furnish the information before taking exemption under Sec.8 of the RTI Act. The CPIO replied on 16.5.08 stating that reasons provided by the Applicant are not convincing because of the copies of the court judgments dt.16.12.98 and 23.8.04 as they relate to private litigation cases between the Applicant and Mr.Ramachandra Rao which do not come under the purview of 'PIL'. Not satisfied with the reply, the Applicant filed an appeal dt.4.6.08 with the Appellate Authority. The Appellate Authority replied on 3.7.08 upholding the decision of the CPIO. Aggrieved with this decision, the Applicant filed a second appeal dt.5.3.09 before the CIC.

2. The Bench of Mrs. Annapurna Dixit, Information Commissioner, scheduled the hearing on May 1, 2009.

3. Mr.M.Nageswara Rao, IPO-C & Deemed PIO represented the Public Authority.

4. The Applicant was not present during the hearing.

Decision

5. The Commission observed, based on the documents provided, that there is a private litigation case between the Appellant and Mr. Ramachandra Rao and that there is no relationship of the disclosure with any public activity or interest and is of the opinion that the address can be provided by the Court to the Applicant, if required and denies the information under Section 8(1)(g) of the RTI Act.

7. The appeal is accordingly disposed off.

(Annapurna Dixit) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy:

(G.Subramanian) Asstt. Registrar Cc:
1. Mr.M.Kaliaperumal Plot No.100, Brindavan Nagar Alwarthirunagar Chennai 600 087
2. Mr.S.Munirathnam The CPIO & Supdt. of Post Offices Department of Post Gudur Division Gudur (NL) 524 101
3. Mr.J.T.Venkateswarlu The Appellate Authority & Director Postal Services Department of Post O/o Post Master General Vijayawada 520 010
4. Officer in charge, NIC
5. Press E Group, CIC