Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

"35. At this juncture, it is necessary to clear some misconceptions about the RTI Act. The RTI Act provides access to all information that is available and existing. This is clear from a combined reading of section 3 and the definitions of `information' and `right to information' under clauses (f) and (j) of section 2 of the Act. If a public authority has any information in the form of data or analysed data, or abstracts, or statistics, an applicant may access such information, subject to the 3 exemptions in section 8 of the Act. But where the information sought is not a part of the record of a public authority, and where such information is not required to be maintained under any law or the rules or regulations of the public authority, the Act does not cast an obligation upon the public authority, to collect or collate such nonavailable information and then furnish it to an applicant. A public authority is also not required to furnish information which require drawing of inferences and/or making of assumptions. It is also not required to provide `advice' or `opinion' to an applicant, nor required to obtain and furnish any `opinion' or `advice' to an applicant. The reference to `opinion' or `advice' in the definition of `information' in section 2(f) of the Act, only refers to such material available in the records of the public authority.
13. Case Laws relied upon by the CPIO are not applicable in the facts of the present case and the one Dr. K.C. Vijaykumaran Nair Vs. Department of Postswhich has been emphatically relied upon by the CPIO has already been overruled by this Hon'ble Commission in Manju v. PIO, Department of Posts in 2017. Similarly, the case of Girish Ramchandra Deshpande vs. Central Information Commission & ors. SLP(C) No. 27734 of 2012 has been discussed in the landmark case of A K Kalra vs. Ministry of Human Resource (Decision No.CIC/RM/A/2014/004365-SA dated 14.02.2017 wherein it has been held that"Compared to an order of division bench of Supreme Court in dismissal of SLP in Girish under Article 136, the decision of the division bench in Writ Appeal in R Rajgopal under Article 141 has binding value as declaration of law." The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Khanapuram Gandaiah versus Administrative Officer and Ors. Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.34868 of 2009 has itself held that "This definition shows that an applicant under Section 6 of the RTI Act can get any information which is already in existence and accessible to the public authority under law. Of course, under the RTI Act an applicant is entitled to get copy of the opinions, advices, circulars, orders, etc...." In CBSE v. Aditya Bandopadhyay & Ors. (2011) 8 SCC 497, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has itself held that "If a public authority has any information in the form of data or analyzed data, or abstracts, or statistics, an applicant may access such information, subject to the exemptions in Section 8 of the Act...."