Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

R Naveen Krishna vs Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax (Cca) , ... on 21 November, 2025

                                केन्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
                          Central Information Commission
                             बाबा गंगनाथ मागग, मुननरका
                           Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                           नई निल्ली, New Delhi - 110067

File No: CIC/CCITH/A/2024/114485

R Naveen Krishna                                      .....अपीलकर्ाग /Appellant

                                        VERSUS
                                         बनाम
PIO,
Office of the Income Tax
Officer, Ward 11(1), 5th
Floor, Signature Towers,
Kondapur, Hyderabad - 500084                          ....प्रनर्वािीगण /Respondent

Date of Hearing                     :    19.11.2025
Date of Decision                    :    21.11.2025

INFORMATION COMMISSIONER :               Vinod Kumar Tiwari

Relevant facts emerging from appeal:

RTI application filed on            :    04.11.2023
CPIO replied on                     :    11.03.2024
First appeal filed on               :    18.03.2024
First Appellate Authority's order   :    15.04.2024
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated          :    01.05.2024

Information sought

:

1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 04.11.2023 (offline) seeking the following information:

"This is R. Naveen Krishna we have two plots plot no's 188, 189 in the S-NO'S 289,290, 291, 292 (part) in Rampally village, keesara mandal of Medchal- Malkajgui district of Telangana in my father Remineni Hanumantha Rar's name. My father purchased these plots vide sale deed document 1571/85 registered in Medchal SRO is 1985. In 2021, we came to know that some unknown person claiming to be R. Hanumantha Rar (which is my father's CIC/CCITH/A/2024/114485 Page 1 of 4 name) had registered our plots one in the name of kunchala venkat Reddy with the help of a fake Pan card and Aadhar Enrollment copy. The unknown person by impersonating my father had executed sale deed no 14741/19 in favour of venkat Reddy Keesara SRO.

Upon my complaint on 19.08.2021 keesara police had registered FIR no 516/2021. After much struggle and fight on my part, Keesara police had filed chargesheet as CC N0-22/2023 in III Additional Junior civil judge court in Malkajgiri with CNR no. TSMM 0200 0031 2023.

The unknown, person (Impersonator) had given his PAN card as proof of his identity. His pan card number AXSPH 9660E dated 19/05/2018. (My father, siginal R- Hanumantha Ror's pan card no is AMIPRO749R dated 01/01/2008). While police had filed chargesheet, they didn't Properly pursue all leads. They have filed charger only against the claimant and completely ignored the authority who had given the impersonated the fake address proof. So, I would like to know what address proof, date of birth proof, and Identity proof does this impersonated who claimed himself to be R. Hanumanth Rar, had submitted to you to get PAN card. The addres given by impersonator is fake and he remains untraced to this day.

I have filed an RTI request to UTIITSL on 25/10/2023 requesting to furnish me the Identity proof, Address proof and Date of Birth proof submitted by the Impersonator. They have answered me stating that the pan # AXSPH9660E of the impersonator was not processed by UTIITSL and suggested me to contact the Income Tax department.

So, I request you to furnish me information the following

1. Identity proof submitted by the impersonator

2. Address proof submitted by the impersonator

3. Date of birth proof submitted by the impersonator."

2. The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 11.03.2024 stating as under:

"On perusal of RTI application filed by the applicant is found that the information sought pertains to third party and personal in nature which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the third party. Further, the disclosure of the above information does not justify larger public interest. In view of the above, the information as sought by applicant cannot be provided in accordance with section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, 2005.

under: The relevant part of the section 8(1)(j) of RTI, Act, 2005 is reproduced as "8. Exemption from disclosure of information-

(j) Information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has not relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that he larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information.""

3. Being dissatisfied, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 18.03.2024. The FAA vide its order dated 15.04.2024, upheld the reply of CPIO.

4. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.

5. Proof of having served a copy of Second Appeal on Respondent while filing the same in CIC is not available on record. Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:

The following were present:-

Appellant: Absent.

Respondent: Shri Ashish Kumar Singh, CPIO-cum-ITO, attended the hearing through VC.

6. The Appellant did not participate in the hearing.

7. The Respondent submitted that the information sought by the Appellant in the instant RTI Application is third party personal information which is exempted from disclosure under Section (8) (1) (j) read with Section 11 of the RTI Act.

Decision:

8. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case and perusal of the records, accepts the stand of the Respondent that the information sought in the instant RTI Application is personal information of third party and the disclosure of the same is exempted from disclosure under Section 8 (1) (j) of the Act. In this regard, the Commission notes that Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CPIO, Supreme Court of India v. Subhash Chandra Agrawal Civil Appeal No. 10044 of 2010, vide order dated 13.11.2019, has held as under:

"59...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....."

9. The above ratio is applicable to this case as well. Hence, no intervention of the Commission is required in the instant case.

The appeal is disposed of accordingly.

Vinod Kumar Tiwari (विनोद कुमार वििारी) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयुक्त) Authenticated true copy (अनिप्रमानणर् सत्यानपर् प्रनर्) (S. Anantharaman) Dy. Registrar 011- 26181927 Date CIC/CCITH/A/2024/114485 Page 4 of 4 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-

Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)