Central Information Commission
Vijay Rawat vs Hemwati Nandan Bahuguna Garhwal ... on 16 March, 2026
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
File No: CIC/HNBGU/A/2025/108792
VIJAY RAWAT .....अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
THE CPIO
HEMVATI NANDAN BAHUGUNA GARHWAL UNIVERSITY,
RTI CELL, ADMINISTRATIVE BUILDING,
SRINAGAR, DISTT-GARHWAL,
UTTARAKHAND-246174 .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 16.03.2026
Date of Decision : 16.03.2026
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Sudha Rani Relangi
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 06.11.2024
CPIO replied on : 28.11.2024
First appeal filed on : 03.12.2024
First Appellate Authority's order : NA
2nd Appeal dated : 05.03.2025
Information sought:
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 06.11.2024 seeking the following information:
" ी बीरलाल आय (हेमंती नंदन ब गुणा गढ़वाल िव िव ालय ीनगर, गढ़वाल) म िजस भी पद पर कायरत रह, उस पद के सापे वष का िववरण (कब से कब तक रहे) व इसके िनयुि से संबंिधत सम त द तावेज क पूण प ावली क स यािपत छाया ित उपल ध कराएं ।"Page 1 of 3
2. The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 28.11.2024 stating as under:
"आपके ारा सूचना अिधकार अिधिनयम-2005 के तहत मांगी गई सूचना जो सहायक नोडल अिधकारी, सूचना अिधकार का को ारा अपने प ांक सं या हे.न.ब.ग.िव.िव./सू.अ. ./प ावली सं०-782/2024/869 दनांक 13-11-2024 के ारा अधोह ता री को ेिषत क गई है के म म अवगत कराना है क आपके ारा मांगी गई सूचना धारा 8(1)(j) के अ तगत कटनीय नही है।"
3. Aggrieved by the decision of the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 03.12.2024. The FAA order is not on record.
4. Aggrieved by the non-disposal of First Appeal, Appellant is before the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Not present.
Respondent: Shri Vijay Pal Singh, AR/PIO present through video conference.
5. Appellant remained absent despite service of hearing notice in advance.
6. Written statement of the PIO is taken on record.
7. PIO stated that Appellant through instant RTI application requested for a photocopy of all documents and complete files related to the appointment of Shri Bir Lal Arya. The information sought, being a third-party's personal information, is exempted from disclosure under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, 2005. Hence, reply was provided to the Appellant earlier and now vide written statement on the same lines.
Decision:
8. Heard the party, appeared.
9. The Commission, after perusal of the facts and circumstances in the matter of this Appeal, finds no infirmity in the submissions of the CPIO as the same was found to be in line with the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005. Moreover, Commission agrees with the stand taken by the CPIO that service related records of Shri Bir Lal Arya pertains to personal information of third party which attracts exemption under Section 8 (1)(j) of the RTI Act, 2005.For Page 2 of 3 that purpose, the hearing Bench relied on the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case titled Girish Ramchandra Deshpande v. Central Information Commissioner & Ors. (SLP (Civil) No. 27734 of 2012) decided on 03.10.2012.It is also relevant to note Section 44 (3) of Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act 2023 was brought into force w.e.f. 14.11.2025 which establishes that Public Authority, no longer requires to justify withholding personal data by weighing Public interest against privacy.
The Appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Sd/-
Sudha Rani Relangi(सुधा रानी रे लग ं ी) Information Commissioner (सूचनाआयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणतस यािपत ित) (Anil Kumar Mehta) Dy. Registrar 011- 26767500 Date Shri VIJAY RAWAT Page 3 of 3 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)