Central Information Commission gave a title to the decision in which CPIO steadfast fought against the disgruntled employee, who blatantly misused RTI, subverted process of law with malicious intentions as Fight of a bold officer against abuse of RTI and directed the Public Authority to place this order in their official website under the heading ‘Fight of a bold officer against abuse of RTI’ in their RTI Section. (If you want to file an RTI , please go to our guide to file RTI online)
Shri Sanjay Chaturvedi posted as a Principal & APIO in the Govt. Sarvodaya Bal Vidyalaya Chirag Enclave, New Delhi submitted to CIC that he is aggrieved with repeated RTI applications filed by Shri Ranjan Sharma (RTI Applicant) and the order passed by the Appellate Authority who allowed inspection of records and directed to provide the documents, free of cost. As the First Appellate Authority has no power to review its order once passed and communicated. CPIO being aggrieved with the decision of the First Appellate Authority, have approached Commission under Section 19 (3) of the Right to Information Act, 2005. For any RTI help, head straight to our forum and post your query. Read more ›
On one hand you can obtain the details of dates and nature of leave taken by the Government servants during his tenure but copy of the leave application and sanction memos would affect the privacy of the concerned individual and therefore exempt under clause Section 8 (1) (j) of the RTI Act. Do read our wiki article about ‘What is Privacy under RTI‘. You can also join us on our Right to Privacy Portal here http://www.rtpindia.org.
Central Information commission recorded in the case where RTI applicant sought information on three points regarding the leave record, leave applications and leave sanction memos in respect of a Branch Manager of the bank. In this context, CIC noted that “records such as leave applications and sanction memos could contain information regarding the concerned Branch Manager, which is of a personal nature. Information regarding the dates and nature of leave has already been provided to the Appellant.” Read more ›
If the profile of the person seeking Information, in light of other attending circumstances, leads to the construction that under the pretext of serving public interest, such person is aiming to settle personal score against the third party, it cannot be said that public interest warrants disclosure of information to third party. The Public Information Officer under Right to Information Act, while dealing with the information relating to or supplied by the third party, has to constantly bear in mind that the RTI Act does not become a tool in the hands of a busy body to settle a personal score.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court vide decision dated 13/12/20012 Bihar Public Service Commission vs. Sayyed Hussain Abbas Rizvi & Anr [Civil appeal No. 9052 of 2012] has held that clause 8(1)(g) can come into play with any kind of relationship. It requires that where the disclosure of such information which would endanger the life or physical safety of any person or identify the source of information or assistance given in confidence for law enforcement or security purpose, the information need not be provided. In other words if in the opinion of the concerned authority there is danger to life or possibility of danger to physical safety, the CPIO would be entitled to bring such case within the exemption of Section 8(1)(g) of the RTI Act.
Husband (RTI Applicant) has filed several RTI applications with the BSNL seeking various information relating to Lady employee of BNSL with whom he appears to have a matrimonial dispute and in response to communications to her by the CPIO under Section 11 of the RTI Act, she has objected to the disclosure stating that the information is of personal nature, does not involve any public activity or interest and would cause unwarranted invasion of her privacy. She has also contended that the appellant, who asserts himself to be her husband, has criminal intent and there is a threat to her physical safety, she has claimed exemption under Section 8 (1) (g) of the RTI Act. Read more ›