Central Information Commission
Mrvibha Devi vs Department Of Posts on 29 July, 2015
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26101592
File No. CIC/BS/A/2014/001804/8204
29 July 2015
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Ms. Vibha Devi
C/o Dr. Som Shekhar
Ambedkar Chowk,
Hiralal Marg, Rishikesh,
District: Dehradun - 249201, Uttarakhand
Respondent : CPIO & Sr. Superintendent of Post Offices
Department of Posts
Jhansi Division
Jhansi - 284001
Uttar Pradesh
RTI application filed on : 04/04/2014
PIO replied on : 01/05/2014 & 26/05/2014
First appeal filed on : 12/05/2014
First Appellate Authority order : No Order
Second Appeal received on : 05/08/2014
Information sought:
The appellant sought the following information:
1. CD of section 4(1)(b) of RTI Act.
2. Details of post offices selected in Jhansi for sending cost of free RTI applications and also name of departments to whom these application are sent by the post offices free of cost.
3. Copy of office order mentioning the time of opening and closing of post offices.
4. Name of the posts for which appointment were made recently in the sub-post office Sankin, Sersa and Kharwa and the mode by which the advertisement was issued for filling up of these, educational qualification required, number of applications received and the procedure applied for selection, and list of selected candidates, and also photocopies of educational qualification certificate of selected candidates.
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
The CPIO has not provided the desired information.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present Appellant: Absent Respondent: Mr. V K Shukla CPIO's representative through VC M: 9415925202 The appellant was given an opportunity to participate in the hearing but she is absent. The CPIO's representative stated that the appellant's RTI application dated 04/04/2014 was replied Page 1 of 2 vide letters dated 01/05/2014 & 30/07/2014. He further stated that information relating to compliance with Section 4(1)(b) and also the names of the post offices authorised to accept RTI applications is displayed on the postal department's website 'indiapost.gov.in'. As regards query 4 he stated that all information has been supplied other than copies of mark sheet of selected candidates which is exempted from disclosure under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act.
Decision notice:
A coordinate bench of this Commission in its decision dated 12/04/2007 [Appeal No. CIC/AT/A/2007/00112] [Shri K. Lall v Sh M K Bagri, Assistant Registrar of Companies & CPIO] has held as under:
".....it would mean that once certain information is placed in public domain accessible to the citizens either freely or on payment of a predetermined price, that information cannot be said to be 'held' or 'under the control' of the public authority and thus would cease to be an 'information' accessible under the RTI Act."
It is apparent from the decision cited above that once the information is brought into the public domain by placing the same on the website the same would cease to be information accessible under the RTI Act.
The CPIO's representative has submitted that information sought under para 1 & 2 is displayed on the postal department's website 'indiapost.gov.in'. Copy of mark sheet submitted by a candidate in connection with his employment is personal information and cannot be disclosed unless the appellant is able to establish larger public purpose.
The appellant has not availed the opportunity to appear before the Commission and demonstrate that the disclosure of the information asked for by her is in larger public interest. It being so, there is no need to interfere with the respondent's decision.
The matter is closed.
BASANT SETH Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy:
(R. L. Gupta) Dy. Registrar/Designated Officer Page 2 of 2