Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 2 of 2 (1.19 seconds)Shri K.L. Bablani vs Directorate General Of Vigilance, ... on 16 September, 2009
In view of the above ratio laid down by the Commission, it is observed that
the furnishing of the copies of the vigilance file of the appellant may lead to
disclosure of some sensitive information which has no bearing with the objective
of the RTI Act, 2005. Further, it is also to be noted that the necessary documents as
required to be given under the department/vigilance rules have already been
provided to the appellant. Hence, copy of the vigilance file cannot be authorized to
be disclosed as this amounts to the information confidentially held by the Public
Page 3 of 5
Authority and thereby falls within the scope of Section 11(1) read with Section
2(n) of the RTI Act 2005. Therefore, the information sought by the appellant is
exempted from disclosure as per the exemption available u/Section 8(1)(g) of the
RTI Act, 2005 on point nos. 1 and 2 of the RTI Act. The information sought by the
appellant on point no. 4 of the RTI application is exempted from disclosure under
Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. However, the information related to correspondence
of Disciplinary Authority, after receiving the report of the inquiry officer with the
Vigilance department and others before taking the final decision on the enquiry
report (as sought by the appellant on point no. 3 of the RTI application) can be
furnished to the appellant within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order.
1