Jump to content
Shrawan

Disc proceedings against other cannot be revealed under RTI

Recommended Posts

Shrawan

Central Information Commission

Decision No. 287/IC(A)/2006

F. No. CIC/MA/A/2006/00417

Dated, the 20th September, 2006

  • Name of the Appellant: Sh. A.J. Gedam, “Jagannathshree”, 13-A, Vanjarinagar, P.O. Ajni, Nagpur – 440 003.
  • Name of the public Authority: State Bank of Hyderabad, Regional Office, Rachna Sansad, 1st floor, 278 S.G. Marg, Prabhadevi, Mumbai – 400 025.

DECISION

 

Facts of the case:

  1. The appellant, an employee of the Bank, had sought information relating to the disciplinary proceedings initiated against another lady officer, and the complaint filed by her against the appellant.
  2. The CPIO refused to furnish the information on the ground that information sought relate to another person, the disclosure of which is not in public interest. Hence, exempt u/s 8(1) (j) of the Act. The appellate
    authority upheld the decision of the CPIO.
  3. Since there is no overriding public interest in disclosure of information sought, the denial of information by the CPIO u/s 8(1) (j) is justified.
  4. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.

Sd/-

(Prof M. M. Ansari)

Information Commissioner

Download the decision from download segment.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ashakantasharma

RTI must be filed taking into account all the rules as per RTI Act. Unnecessary RTI Wastes time and money for both the parties...

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Prasad GLN

I have my own reservations against this decision.  As a victim, every complainant has a right to know as to what happened to his complaint.  Disciplinary proceedings once again varies from case to case.  In a Bank, where trust is the key factor, larger public interest of public money is involved.  In case of moral turpitude and personal disorders can certainly hamper public satisfaction.

There is no hard and fast rule in such second appeals.  The deficiency is with appellant, who has not established larger public interest.   If properly presented, every issue involves some larger public interest.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Prasad GLN

Another interesting CIC decision by Hon IC Bhargava in Harinder Dhingra Vs. Oriental Bank of Commerce on officers involved in Vijaya mallaya scam...IC upheld the denial stating that it may endanger the life of such corrupt officials.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Similar Content

    • Shree Vathsan
      By Shree Vathsan
      Can the General Diary of the police station where particulars of "All the details in r/o criminals arrested and entry of arrival/departure of all enrolled police officers on duty with nature of their duties, duty performed and places visited etc."   are maintained be inspected and photo copies sought from a particular police station under RTI?
      Is there any particular clause/section that needs to be quoted for inspection under RTI? Any format available for inspection under RTI?
    • Shree Vathsan
      By Shree Vathsan
      The person in the article below is me. I had a corporation official visit my house with the RTI and asking for my whereabouts. However the PIO has sent a reply on 8/5/19  stating that AE Div 170 is the person responsible for inspecting the banners on the particular stretch. It is after finalising this reply that I had got a call from AE Div 170 on 8/5/19 evening and a person visited my house on 9/5/19. The reply sent by PIO dated 8/5/19 was received on 11/5/19.
      Further The AE has stated that he has inspected the stretch and removed illegal banners immediately. However I have material evidence that the banners remained in the same place from afternoon till late night. Only the persons who kept the banner had removed them. So can I penalise the PIO for providing false and incorrect information. 
       

Announcements

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use & Privacy Policy