TMI Blog2010 (3) TMI 951X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mission s New Delhi office, from where the Commission conducted its hearing. 2. Presently, four queries, viz. Sl. Nos. i, ii, v and vii appearing in appellant s RTI-application dated 24-3-2009 are subjects of this second-appeal. These queries read as follows :- i Copy of UO Note of Directorate of Vigilance sent to CVC seeking first stage advice in respect of Amarjeet Singh and Sh. D.S. Sra. ii. Copy of UO Note of Directorate of Vigilance seeking reconsideration of CVC advice in respect of Sh. D.S. Sra. v. Copy of Comments of Directorate of Vigilance (DOV) on the replies/representations/letters filed by Shri D.S. Sra. vii. Comments of the Directorate of Vigilance on the above mentioned reply/written statement of defence of Sh. D.S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Enquiry Officer would amount to impeding the process of the enquiry and hence would attract Section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act. 6. Respondents have further argued that Commission, in its earlier decisions in Dr. G. Sreekumar Menon v. DGV Customs Central Excise; Appeal No. CIC/AT/A/2008/00918; Date of Decision : 27-11-2008 and R.K. Singh v. DGV Customs Central Excise; Appeal No. CIC/AT/A/2008/00222; Date of Decision : 30-6-2008 had directed that vigilance enquiry reports were not to be disclosed when an enquiry based upon that report was in progress. 7. Appellant pointed out that he had attempted to seek from the Enquiry Officer for the disciplinary proceedings against appellant the documents he has now sought under the RTI Act. The E ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nket exemption covering all information relating to investigation process and even partial information wherever justified can be granted. Exemption under Section 8(1)(h) necessarily is for a limited period and has a end point i.e. when process of investigation is complete or offender has been apprehended and prosecution ends. Protection from disclosure will also come to an end when disclosure of information no longer causes impediment to prosecution of offenders, apprehension of offenders or further investigation. 10. From that standpoint, the information at Sl. Nos. 5 and 7 of appellant s RTI-application dated 24-3-2009 should be disclosed. 11. But, this matter needs also to be examined from another angle, i.e. Section 8(1)(j) of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... view is that an enquiry or an investigation calls in question the conduct and action of an employee and hence is entirely personal to him. It relates to no other person, but that employee and disclosure of any information about that investigation or enquiry would have the impact of impairing the reputation and the standing of the employee. It even has the potentiality to harm that employee in other ways since it can be picked on by his adversaries to cause him harm or handicap in matters such as career-progression, litigation and even social interactions. Further, in terms of the definition of the term personal as found in the Law Lexicon, the word personal means pertaining to a person or bodily form, of or relating to a particular perso ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... possession of the public authorities and the right to privacy. Both rights are not absolute or complete. In case of a clash, larger public interest is the determinative test. Public interest element sweeps through Section 8(1)(j). Unwarranted invasion of privacy of any individual is protected in public interest, but gives way when larger public interest warrants disclosure. This necessarily has to be done on case to case basis taking into consideration many factors having regard to the circumstances of each case. Therefore, it would be incorrect to say that an official action against the employee of a public authority excludes the rest of the world, because in actual fact, it doesn t. The employee is appointed by the public authority to di ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mation to the other party), I do not see any difficulty in authorizing the disclosure of the requested information. I also factored into my analysis in this matter the fact that what the appellant is seeking is information regarding discharge of another officer in a common enquiry which was launched against that officer as well as the appellant. Appellant was not discharged. The canons of justice and prudence would, therefore, dictate that he be allowed access to the material which permitted the public authority to exonerate the third-party, Shri D.S. Sra, but to continue the investigation against the appellant. 20. It is, accordingly, directed that these four items of information shall be provided to the appellant (after applying Section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
