Central Information Commission
Jay Mazoomdaar vs Central Zoo Authority, New Delhi on 30 September, 2022
Author: Saroj Punhani
Bench: Saroj Punhani
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबागंगनाथमाग , मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
File No : CIC/CZAUR/A/2022/642687
Jay Mazoomdaar ......अपीलकता /Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO,
Central Zoo Authority, RTI
Cell, B-1 Wing, 6th Floor,
Pt. Deendayal Antyodaya Bhawan,
CGO Complex, Lodhi Road,
New Delhi-110003 .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 29/09/2022
Date of Decision : 29/09/2022
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Saroj Punhani
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 23/02/2022
CPIO replied on : 22/03/2022 & 27/05/2022
First appeal filed on : 01/06/2022
First Appellate Authority order : Not on record
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : NIL
Information sought:
The Appellant filed an online RTI application dated 23.02.2022 seeking the following information:
1) "All communications between the CZA and the Greens Zoological, Rescue and Rehabilitation Kingdom / Greens Zoological, Rescue and Rehabilitation Centre/ 1 Greens Zoological Rescue and Rehabilitation Centre Society / Reliance Industries Limited / Reliance Foundation, along with attachments/annexures, between 01- 01-2018 and 23-02-2022
2) Minutes of the 81st meeting of the Expert Group on Zoo Designing of the CZA held on 29-01-2019
3) Minutes of the 87th meeting of the Technical Committee of the CZA held on 01- 02-2019
4) Minutes of the 33rd meeting of the CZA held on 12-02-2019
5) Minutes of the 91st meeting of the Expert Group on Zoo Designing of the CZA held on 23 & 24-01-2020."
The CPIO/Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Central Zoo Authority, New Delhi furnished a point wise reply to the appellant on 22.03.2022 which is as under -
Point no. 1 - The requested information is voluminous and diverse in nature and scattered across multiple files. Collating and compiling such information would invariably involve huge diversion of resources of the Central Zoo Authority. Hence, it is requested that specific material record may be specified or physically inspect the documents in this office on 1-4-2022. Points no. 2, 3 & 4- The requested information is annexed herewith as Annexure 1, 2 & 3.
The CPIO/Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Central Zoo Authority, New Delhi again furnished a detailed reply to the appellant on 27.05.2022 stating as follows:-
".............the information sought by you has been treated as "confidential" in nature and further objections have been raised against the proposed disclosure of information on grounds inter alia that it contains personal information disclosure of which has no relationship to any public interest and would cause unwarranted invasion of privacy.
In this connection, some important observations made by the Hon'ble Tripura High Court in the recent decision of Sri Mrigankar Sekhar Dey vs Union of India WP(C)(PIL) No. 05/2022 wherein the undersigned was arrayed as Respondent No. 2 is extracted below for reference: -
"Where a statute confers a right; which in the instant case is the right of a third party to refuse furnishing of private or confidential information, same cannot be wiped out in a manner except as set out in that statute. In order to outweigh the 2 privacy/confidentiality of a third party; presumptions and baseless allegations alone are not sufficient, and the seeker of information must set out compelling grounds and circumstances rooted in facts to warrant infringement of privacy/confidentiality. Provisions of RTI cannot be read down to make privacy of individuals amenable to fishing inquiry and a fine balance is required to be maintained between public-interest and privacy/confidentiality of private party.
We find that Section 11 of the RTI Act, 2005 warrants no interference. No information regarding the Greens Zoological Rescue and Rehabilitation Kingdome or any such private set-up can be provided under the RTI act without the consent of such party."
Based on the aforesaid decision, it is observed that there are no "compelling grounds and circumstances" in your RTI Application that would warrant the disclosure of such confidential information. A copy of the submissions received from the Director Greens Zoological."
Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 01.06.2022. FAA's order, if any, is not available on record.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, the appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal on the ground of non- receipt of complete desired information despite availing opportunity of inspection of relevant records. He further prayed for the following information -
a) the Detailed Project Report of Greens Zoological, Rescue and Rehabilitation Kingdom/Centre
b) CZA Letter No. 20-1/2019-CZA(PKR)/2183/2020 dated 06.02.2020,
c) CZA Letter No. 7-9/2020-CZA dated 08.06.2020,
d) Email to CZA on 03-08-2021, with attachments, from [email protected], and
e) the Master Plan of Greens Zoological, Rescue and Rehabilitation Kingdom/Centre.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Present through intra-video conference. Respondent: Ravindra Singh Rawat, CPIO along with Surya Gupta, Law officer & Rep. of CPIO present through intra-video conference.3
The Appellant reiterated the contents of the instant Appeal as mentioned in the preceding paragraphs.
The Rep. of CPIO submitted that a point wise reply along with the relevant available information has already been provided to the Appellant and that in response to the instant RTI Application, an opportunity of inspection of relevant records was also offered to him twice in April, 2022 which was duly availed by the Appellant. However, in pursuance of observations made by the Hon'ble Tripura High Court in the recent decision of Sri Mrigankar Sekhar Dey vs Union of India WP(C)(PIL) No. 05/2022 at this stage, no additional information can be made available to the Appellant.The CPIO read out the relevant extracts of this judgment as discussed in his reply brought out in the preceding paras.
The Appellant interjected to state that obiter dicta of the averred High Court's order is not applicable to his case.
Decision:
The Commission observes from a perusal of records and after hearing submissions of both the parties at length that the reply coupled with the offer of inspection provided by the CPIO of relevant records to the Appellant on two occasions and which was duly availed of by the Appellant adequately suffices the information sought by the Appellant as per the provisions of RTI Act. The Bench appreciates the fact that the Appellant had already availed of the inspection opportunities twice and whatever documents/ records were sought by him were duly provided by the CPIO in the spirit of RTI Act.
Further, the contents of information sought by the Appellant now through the instant Appeal seems to be additional relief sought for was in fact, not part of his original RTI Application.
In view of the above, no further relief can be granted in the matter.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Saroj Punhani (सरोज पुनहािन) हािन) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) 4 Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स#यािपत ित) (C.A. Joseph) Dy. Registrar 011-26179548/ [email protected] सी. ए. जोसेफ, उप-पंजीयक दनांक / 5