Central Information Commission
Jyoti vs Directorate Of Education on 20 December, 2023
केन्द्रीय सच
ू ना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ मागग, मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई दिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
File No :CIC/DIRED/A/2023/616803
Jyoti .....अपीलकर्ाग/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
PIO,
Directorate of Education, DDE,
Dist. SW, B-1, Najafgarh,
NewDelhi-110043 ....प्रनर्वािीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 13-12-2023
Date of Decision : 18-12-2023
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 17-01-2023
PIO replied on : 20-01-2022
First appeal filed on : 22-01-2023
First Appellate Authority's order : 21-02-2023
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : NIL
Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 17.01.2023 seeking the following information:
"According to the CBSE norms CTET paper 2 must be cleared in the concerned subjects, but it has been observed that some students have cleared CTET paper 1
2 in maths and science bur they got selection in DSSSB TGT SOCIAL SCIENCE EXAM post code 40/21 and got joining in DOE (Delhi govt.) schools for the post of TGT social science (female) post code 40/21. Kindly provide the CTET marksheet roll no. of below mentioned candidates in post code 40/21 of TGT social science to check the genuineness of their CTET certificates and marksheet because there is a strong suspicion that these candidates have shown forged/ fake CTET certificates at the time of document verification. The candidate are:
1. Arpita Gupta Dob 25.01.1995.
Roll no- 411040100965.
Posted at Sagarpur No.2 skv 1821017.
2. Chhavi jain DOB 14.12.1992 Roll no 412040102504.
Posted at Gandhi nagar no 2 ggsss 1003034."
The PIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 20.01.2022 by enclosing the copy of relevant information against point no. 1.
Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 22.01.2023. The FAA's vide its order dated 21.02.2023, held as under:
"I have gone through the RTI appeal, as well as the reply submitted by the PIO/DDE- Zone-21, Distt. Southwest-B, Najafgarh. It has been submitted that information has been sent in respect of Ms. Arpita Gupta, one of the two candidates; however, information in respect of the other candidate, Ms. Chhavi Jain, does not pertain to that office and hence, cannot be provided. In view of the above, I find the disposal of the instant RTI Application to be not satisfactory. The PIO is directed to transfer the application in part, as per section 6(3) of the RTI Act to the PIO to whom it is more closely connected, within 15 days of receipt of this order. Appeal disposed of accordingly."
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal on the ground of non-receipt of information pertaining to Ms. Chhavi Jain.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:-2
Appellant: Not present.
Respondent: Shri Bijender Singh, PIO present in person.
The Respondent submitted that requested information of Ms. Arpita Gupta pertains to his Zone and the same was provided to the Appellant. While, information of other mentioned candidate relates to DDE, Zone 3; therefore, in compliance to FAA's order RTI Application was forwarded to the concerned PIO vide letter dated 28.02.2023 with intimation to the Appellant.
Decision:
The Commission after scrutinizing the contents of RTI Application observes that the roll no. and marksheet of the averred candidates entails invasion of privacy of third party which attract the exemption clause of Section 8(1)(j) of RTI Act. The same can be garnered from a bare perusal of the text of Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act as under:
"....(j) information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no 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 the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information;.."
The same is in line with a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the matter of Central Public Information Officer, Supreme Court of India Vs. Subhash Chandra Agarwal in Civil Appeal No. 10044 of 2010 with Civil Appeal No. 10045 of 2010 and Civil Appeal No. 2683 of 2010 wherein the import of "personal information" envisaged under Section 8(1)(j) of RTI Act has been exemplified in the context of earlier ratios laid down by the same Court in the matter(s) of Canara Bank Vs. C.S. Shyam in Civil Appeal No.22 of 2009; Girish Ramchandra Deshpande vs. Central Information Commissioner &Ors., (2013) 1 SCC 212 and R.K. Jain vs. Union of India & Anr., (2013) 14 SCC 794.The following was thus held:
"59. Reading of the aforesaid judicial precedents, 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, 3 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..."
Nonetheless, the replies provided by the Respondent are in consonance with the provisions of RTI Act, merits of which cannot be called into question.
In view of the above and considering more particularly the absence of the Appellant during hearing to buttress her case, no further intervention of this Commission is warranted in the matter.
The appeal is dismissed accordingly.
Vinod Kumar Tiwari (विनोद कुमार तििारी) Information Commissioner (सच ू ना आयक् ु ि) Authenticated true copy (अभिप्रमाणणर् सत्यापपर् प्रनर्) (R K Rao) Dy. Registrar 011-26181927 Date 18-12-2023 Jyoti E-1/7/31, sector-15, Rohini, Delhi - 110089 4