Jump to content

Question

rajub

I have asked for names of employees present and absent on a given date (under RTI) and certified copy of muster roll of the day.

 

It was denied under sec 8(1)(j).

 

I am searching the web for exact decisions of CIC and HC clearly mentioning "names of employees present/absent".

 

I will be thankful if references are quoted here by my dear friends.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0
cleancorruption

The below Judgment can be found in Indian Kanoon - Search engine for India Law

 

Delhi High Court in RTI connected matters- W.P(CIVIL) NOS.8396/2009, 16907/2006, 4788/2008, 9914/2009, 6085/2008, 7304/2007, 7930/2009 AND 3607/2007

quoting(

As observed by S. Ravindra Bhat, J. the third part of Section 8(1)(j) reconciles two legal interests protected by law i.e. right to access information in 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.

 

In S.P. Gupta (supra), the Supreme Court held that democratic form of Government necessarily requires accountability which is possible only when there is openness, transparency and knowledge. Greater exposure about functioning of the Government ensures better and more efficient administration, promotes and encourages honesty and discourages corruption, misuse or abuse of authority,

 

Possibly the only class of documents which are granted immunity from disclosure is those mentioned under Article 74(2) of the Constitution. These are documents or information which are granted immunity from disclosure not because of their contents but because of the class to which they belong. Other documents and information which do not fall under Article 74(2) of the Constitution cannot be held back on the ground that they belong to a particular class which is granted absolute protection against disclosure. All other documents/information is not granted absolute or total immunity.

 

--- My argument would be ---

1. There is simply no privacy here.

2. Employees attendance is required as it has been learnt that most civil servants are not attending duties and as result the case file are pending and rusting.

3. The public is an employer via the Government and the public interest warrants whether employees are attending the duties.

4. The information sought is neither a classified information not an official secret document. The information and the document sought is neither a document that can be denied to parliament.

It is settled law that the any document not denied to the parliament cannot be withheld.

 

Best of Luck.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
gmphadte

Information which relates to personal information...

 

First of all, this information cannot be classified as personal information. This muster roll is the record generated by the staff of that PA, which otherwise means PA itself.

 

Remember it is not personnel but personal

 

Gajanan Phadte

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
RAVEENA_O

A close look at provision 8(1)(j) would reveal that denial of Muster Roll under this sec. is totally illegal. There is nothing personal in a Muster Roll or Attendance Sheet of a Public Office. On the other hand it is a public document indicating absence and/or presence of each employee of the office which is directly related to public activity and public interest. Disclosure of Muster Roll / Attendance Sheet shall in no way cause unwarranted (or even warranted) invasion of privacy of any individual. The larger public interest justify that the presence and absence of public employees in their office must be open to public scrutiny. How can PIO justify invasion of privacy of individual by disclosure of Muster Roll / Attendance Sheet?

 

 

 

Please read following CIC Decisions.

 

ic.gov.in/CIC-Orders/Decision_23032007_02.pdf

cic.gov.in/CIC-Orders/Decision_26042007_05.pdf

cic.gov.in/CIC-Orders/Decision_26042007_06.pdf

cic.gov.in/convention-2008/Report-On-Convention-2008.pdf

cic.gov.in/CIC-Orders/SG-07102009-02.pdf

cic.gov.in/CIC-Orders/SG-26062009-22.pdf

cic.gov.in/CIC-Orders/SG-24032009-21.pdf

cic.gov.in/CIC-Orders/SG-24062009-12.

  • Like 2

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
Answer this question...

×   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

    • Atul Patankar
      By Atul Patankar
      As reported at www.indopia.in on 2 March 2009
       
      New Delhi, Mar 2 (PTI) Leaves availed during the service period are not personal and private matter of the employee and should be disclosed under the RTI Act, the CIC has held.
      "Leave taken by an employee from a public authority is a matter of exercise of the discretion vested in the public authority to grant such leave. There can be no bar on the disclosure of an information which is about how the public authority exercises its powers to grant leave to its employee,"the CIC said in its ruling.
       
      Information Commissioner A N Tiwari was hearing the plea of one Raj Kumar who sought information about the leave account of an employee of the New India Assurance Company Limited.
       
      The insurance company had rejected the application on the grounds that it was personal information of the employee, a third party, and could not be disclosed.
       
      "It cannot be said to be a personal or a private matter of that employee,"Tiwari said directing the insurance company to disclose the information within two weeks of the receipt of the order.
       
      Source: 514549 : National : Leaves not a personal matter of an employee: CIC
    • santroingo
      By santroingo
      i am a central government officer
      no.2 in the office
      My Boss is harassing me by many ways
      like not sanctioning of leave, incorrect pay fixation on revision of pay due to latest sixth CPC , using office machinery for personal use, like that
       
      My superiors at other station also helps him, may be because of some fear or do not wish to interfere in any other activities which are not framed.

Announcements

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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