Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2013 (3) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (3) TMI 442 - DELHI HIGH COURTWrit Petition - Petition is filed against the decision of the CIC preferred under Section 19 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 whereby the petitioner has been directed to provide the relevant records in its possession as sought by the Respondent herein. The respondent by an application filed under Section 6 of the Act, sought the following Information from the petitioner inspection of the records and other many documents relating to the proposed disciplinary action and/or imposition of penalty against Shri G.S. Narang, IRS, Central Excise and Customs Officer of 1974 Batch and also inspection of records, files, etc., relating to the decision of the UPSC thereof. The CPIO of the petitioner, however, declined to provide the same on the ground that the information sought pertained to the disciplinary case was of personal nature, disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest. The petitioner, therefore, claimed exemption from disclosing the information under Section 8(1)(j) of the Act. The Respondent, consequently, filed an appeal under Section 19 of the Act, before the 1st Appellate Authority of the Petitioner. The Appellate Authority dismissed the Appeal on the same ground. Being aggrieved by the said decision, the Respondent preferred an appeal before the CIC. Setting aside the decision of the ‘First Appellate Authority’, the CIC held as follows. CIC are of the view that the CPIO was not right in denying this information. Being aggrieved by the order of CIC Petitioner filed the writ petition. Petitioner submits that the information sought by the Respondent in his RTI application is not with the Petitioner and stated that the said information relates to the actions of the concerned Ministry/Department and as such no record thereof is available and rest of the Information sought by the Respondent is exempt from disclosure under Section 8(1)(e), 8(1)(g) and 8(1)(j) of the Act. The Respondent, on the other hand, has at the outset submitted that the CIC has merely directed the disclosure of the records in possession of the UPSC. It has not directed the Petitioner to procure records from the concerned Ministries and the same is not exempted under Section 8(1)(e), 8(1)(g) or 8(1)(j) of the Act. Held that : - After Examining the Section 8(1)(e), 8(1)(g) or 8(1)(j) of the Act. In view of above, the decision of the CIC is upheld, subject to the modification that the petitioner may, examine the case with regard to applicability of Section 10 of the Act, in relation to the names of the officers who may have acted in the process of opinion formation while dealing with the case of concerned charge officer.
|