Central Information Commission
B Ashok Kumar vs Coir Board on 19 August, 2021
Author: Vanaja N Sarna
Bench: Vanaja N Sarna
क य सुचना आयोग
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
बाबा गंगनाथ माग
Baba Gangnath Marg
मुिनरका,
नरका नई द लीÐ
लीÐ 110067
Munirka, New Delhi-110067
File no.: CIC/COIRB/A/2019/125312
In the matter of:
B Ashok Kumar
... Appellant
VS
Central Public Information Officer
Coir Board, Coir House,
M G Road, Kochi - 682016
...Respondent
RTI application filed on : 21/11/2018 CPIO replied on : 20/12/2018 First appeal filed on : 17/01/2019 First Appellate Authority order : 26/02/2019 Second Appeal dated : 25/05/2019 Date of Hearing : 18/08/2021 Date of Decision : 18/08/2021
Note: The Appellant vide his letter dated 10/08/2021 has stated that he is a doctor by profession and is working at Govt TD Medical College, Alleppey, Kerala. Due to alarming situation of Covid-19 in Kerala, he is required to attend hospital duties at any time. As such he will not be able to attend the hearing and the case may be decided on the basis of documents on record.
The following were present:
Appellant: Submissions received Respondent: Not present Information Sought:
The Appellant has sought the following information pertaining to a complaint filed in the Kerala Women's Commission (KWC), with respect to the harassment of Smt. Dhanalekshmi N, his wife, working as Hindi Officer, Coir 1 Board, Kochi by Shri V. P. Gopalkrishnan Administrative officer, Coir Board (opposite party):
1 (a). Provide copies of the intimation /notices /letters, if any, received in Coir Board Office from KWC on office to office or establishment to establishment basis.
1 (b). Provide copies of the intimation/notices/ letters, along with all enclosures, sent by KWC to the opposite party in the complaint. 1 (c). Provide a copy of the communication/memorandum no. A-59/91/2018 ADM (Personnel) dated 05/07/2018 issued by the Coir Board to Smt. Dhanalekshmi, N, Hindi Officer, Coir Board, calling her comments/ replies. 1 (d, e &f) - Information on other related points.
2. Provide a copy of the entire noting file dealing with the processing of the notice issued to the opposite party with a copy to the Coir Board.
3. Provide a copy each of the communications / submissions given to the Coir Board by the opposite party.
4. Provide a copy of the permission/ approval/consent, if any accorded by the Coir Board to Shri V. P. Gopalkrishnan Administrative officer (opposite party), permitting him to appear before KWC for the hearing/adalat held on 10.07.2018
5. And other related information.
Grounds for Second Appeal The CPIO has denied the information under Section 8(1) (j) of the RTI Act 2005.
Submissions made by Appellant and Respondent during Hearing:
The appellant in his second appeal memo has stated that he is not satisfied with the reply of the CPIO as he being the husband of the third party i.e. Smt Dhanalekshmi N, has every right to get all the information related to her, moreso, when the third party had given her consent in disclosing the information to him. He in his written submissions dated 15.04.2021 has also stated that even though the information sought is no more relevant to him as his grievance has been redressed, however, action may be taken for incorrect denial of the information by the CPIO.
The CPIO was not present during the hearing.2
Observations:
From a perusal of the relevant case records, it is noted that a suitable reply was given to the appellant vide the CPIO's letter dated 20.12.2018 as the information sought by the appellant is related to a third party and is exempted from disclosure u/s 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. It is pertinent to mention here that the consent given by the third party i.e. Dhanalekshmi N to disclose the information related to her to the appellant bears no significance to the case as the CPIO never intended to disclose such information to the appellant and Section 11 clearly says that the consent of a third party is to be sought only in such cases where the CPIO intends to part with the information related to a third party. Therefore, the Commission does not find any flaw in the reply of the CPIO or the FAA order and hence no action is warranted in the matter.
Decision:
In view of the above, the Commission upholds the reply of the CPIO and does not find any scope for further intervention in the matter.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
वनजा एन.
Vanaja N. Sarna (वनजा एन. सरना) सरना सूचनाआयु") Information Commissioner (सू Authenticated true copy (अिभ%मा&णत स)या*पत%ित) A.K. Assija (ऐ.के. असीजा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26182594 / दनांक/ Date 3