Central Information Commission
Mangi Lal Raw vs Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan on 21 April, 2021
Author: Saroj Punhani
Bench: Saroj Punhani
के य सच
ू ना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मु नरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ल , New Delhi - 110067
File No : CIC/KVSAN/A/2019/137234
Mangi Lal Raw .....अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO,
Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan,
RTI Cell, Regional Office, 92 Gandhi
Nagar Marg, Bajaj Nagar, Jaipur - 302015. .... तवाद गण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 20/04/2021
Date of Decision : 20/04/2021
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Saroj Punhani
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 23/05/2019
CPIO replied on : 31/05/2019
First appeal filed on : 20/06/2019
First Appellate Authority order : 12/07/2019
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 30/07/2019
Information soughtand background of the case:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 23.05.2019 seeking information as under-
1. "Provide a certified photocopy of the memorandum issued to Shri Sanwar Mal SSA (presently deployed in Kendriya Vidyalya No.7 CISF, Jaipur), during his stay in XV Jalore in the session 2017-18 and 2018-19.
2. Provide a certified photocopy of the charge sheet issued to Shri Sanwar Mal, SSA by the then Disciplinary Authority of KV Jalore Shri AS Bhati, then Principal of KV No.2 AFS, Jodhpur.
3. Provide a certified copy of the memorandum issued to Shri Sanwar Mal SSA by the then Disciplinary Authority of KV Jalore Shri AS Bhati, then Principal of KV No.2 AFS Jodhpur regarding with-holding of two increments on disciplinary ground.
4. Provide a certified copy of the memorandum issued to Shri Sanwar Mal, SSA by the then Deputy Commissioner Shri Jaydeep Das, KVS, RO, Jaipur regarding expunging/dismissal of charges framed against the Incharge Principal Shri Mangi Lal Raw, by Shri Sanwar Mal, SSA and up-holding decision given by the (Disciplinary Authority for with-holding of two- increments.
5. Provide a certified copy of the complaint letter (against the Incharge principal Shri Lal(Raw) written by Shri Sanwar Mal, SSA directly to the Hon'ble DC, KVS, RO, Jaipur along with the enclosures.
6. Provide a certified copy of the memorandum issued to Shri Sanwar Mal, SSA regarding extension of his probation period.
7. Provide a certified copy of the letter written by the Principal KV Jalore to the then Dy. Commissioner Shri Jaydeep Das, KVS, RO, Jaipur regarding transfer of Shri Sanwar Mal, SSA on administrative ground along with the recommendations of the Hon'ble Chairman, VMC, KV Jalore."
The CPIO denied information to the Appellant on 31.05.2019 under section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, 2005.
Being dissatisfied, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 20.06.2019. FAA's order dated 12.07.2019 upheld the reply of CPIO.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Present through audio-conference. Respondent: Mukesh Kumar, Assistant Commissioner & CPIO, present through audio-conference.
The Appellant expressed his dissatisfaction with the CPIO's reply and submitted that the information has been wrongly denied to him under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act.
The CPIO submitted that the information sought by the Appellant pertains to third party's personal information, therefore the same has been denied under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act.
Decision:
The Commission observes from a perusal of the facts on record that the denial of the information as sought for in the instant RTI Application by the CPIO including a copy of the charge sheet and/or memorandum issued to the concerned third party (Shri Sanwar Mal, SSA) is in consonance with Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. The said denial is in line with a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court 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.
In view of foregoing discussion, the Commission finds no scope of further intervention in the matter and upholds the reply of CPIO.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Saroj Punhani (सरोज पन ु हा न) Information Commissioner (सच ू ना आयु त) Authenticated true copy (अ!भ मा#णत स$या%पत त) (C.A. Joseph) Dy. Registrar 011-26179548/ [email protected] सी. ए. जोसेफ, उप-पंजीयक दनांक /