9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (7) TMI 1012X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e. That application was rejected by the Public Information Officer in his letter dated 16-3-2009 on the ground that the information sought was exempt under Section 8(1)(j) of the Right to Information Act, 2005. Being aggrieved by the said communication, the appellant preferred an appeal to the appellate authority and the same was also rejected on 22-4-2009 with the same reason. Thereafter, the appellant filed a further appeal to the State Information Commission. The State Information Commission held that Section 8(1)(j) is not applicable for the assets details of Government servants. Nevertheless, it found that the information presented in a sealed cover constitutes information that is "held" by the public authority to ensure confidentiality and the assets details of public servants are personal information and since there was no public interest cause established, the information need not be disclosed. The said order was unsuccessfully challenged by the appellant in the writ petition giving rise to the present writ appeal. 2. We have heard Dr. V. Krishna Ananth, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Vivek Sriram, learned counsel for the first respondent and Mr. M.C. Swamy, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... people to information about the government's functioning is a vital component of democracy. Disclosure of allowable information would lead to better system and it would be in the public interest that a public authority should throw open the process of public scrutiny, which would result in evolving a better system. Disclosure of information would compromise the integrity and efficiency of the functioning of the public authority. In an increasingly knowledge-based society, information and access to information holds the key to resources, benefits and distribution of power. Information, more than any other element, is of critical importance in a participatory democracy. 9. The Right to Information Act is a rights based enactment more akin to any other enactments safeguarding fundamental rights. As the statement of the object of the Act goes, democracy requires an informed citizenry and transparency of information. The Act encompasses basically two things, firstly, the right of a citizen to seek for information to which he is entitled under the provisions of the Act and the corresponding duty of the information officers to furnish such information and secondly, it leads to trans ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Broadcasting, Government of India v. The Cricket Association of Bengal, (1995) 2 SCC 179, the Apex Court, while considering the freedom of speech and expression in the light of the right to information, has observed that "freedom of speech and expression is basic to and indivisible from a democratic polity. It includes the right to impart and receive information." The Apex Court has also observed that "for ensuring the free speech right of the citizens of the country, it is necessary that the citizens have the benefit of plurality of views and a range of opinions on all public issues and a successful democracy posits an 'aware' citizenry." 13. The pride for enactment of the Right to Information Act would certainly go to the judiciary as could be seen from certain observations of the Hon'ble Apex Court in some of the judgments. The judgment in Union of India v. Association for Democratic Reforms, AIR 2002 SC 2112 is again a forerunner for recognising the right to information as a fundamental right and the said judgment laid the foundation over which the superstructure of the Right to Information Act, 2005 was built. In Peoples Union for Civil Liberties v. Union of India repor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion as to the assets declaration relates to personal information, the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest or which would cause unwarranted invasion of privacy of the individual. It is the further contention of the Information Commission that the information furnished in sealed cover is "held" by the Government, which has no access to such information, and therefore the question of either furnishing the information or making the access to such information is protected under Section 8(1)(j). For deciding the issue raised in this appeal, the following provisions of the Right to Information Act are referable and they read thus : "2.(f) "information" means any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic form and information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force. 2.(j) "right to information" means the right to information accessible under this Act which is held by or under the control of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... life. Apparently, the balancing task to find out as to whether a particular information is a public information or an information relating to public duty is not that much easy. The balancing exercise necessarily depended on case to case basis on the following relevant considerations : (i) Whether information is deemed to comprise the individual's private details unrelated to his position in the organisation? (ii) Whether the disclosure of personal information is with the aim of providing knowledge of the proper performance of the duties and task assigned to the public servants in any specific case? and (iii) Whether the disclosure will furnish any information requires to establish accountability or transparency in the use of public resources? An information relating to private duty which is not accessible by the public authority is an information as provided under Section 8(1)(j), that is a right of privacy. Nevertheless, if a government servant furnishes assets details to the Government and if he is accountable to file such assets details as required under the rules, such information relating to the assets cannot be c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ets details of I.A.S. Officers could be disclosed, it has been observed that as the copy of the order was not furnished, the Court was not in a position to go into that aspect. The learned Judge has denied the request of the appellant for the information on the ground that the information is not accessible to the public authority and therefore the appellant cannot compel the public authority to give that information. This reason shall not hold good, as the details of the assets declaration have already been hosted on the website. Equally the reason that the documents are confidential in nature is no more available for the State to contend in view of the subsequent event which we would be referring immediately. 9. Rule 16 of the All India Services (Conduct) Rules, 1968 mandates the member of the service to submit a return of his assets and liabilities to the Government. That apart, the Government of India, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pension, Department of Personnel and Training, New Delhi has issued a Circular dated 4-4-2011, which reads as under:- "Subject :Submission of immovable property returns by I.A.S. Officers for the year 2010 (as on 1-1-2011) - Plac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... icity, as such information is liable for hacking. The said information has also no evidentiary value. In view of the above change of circumstances, there cannot be any impediment for the Information Commission to allow the appellant to access the information sought for in his application. We find force in the above submission. 12. As regards the right of the appellant to seek for inspection of the assets details for the past five years preceding 2009 is concerned, we may point out that the details of the assets furnished, as furnished in the typed set of papers by the respondents, would not clearly indicate whether those assets details are in respect of the five years for the period between 2004 and 2009. The right of the appellant to have the inspection of the assets declaration cannot be now denied on the ground that they are personal informations, the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, as the same is no more available in the wake of the subsequent events, namely, the assets details have been hosted on the website. Hence, the order of the learned Judge rejecting the request of the appellant for inspection of the assets details of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
