Jump to content
  • 0

RTI reply from MTNL, PIO denying information sought for address, date of installation of landline installed.




I had made an application on date 16/08/2017 asking details of two landlines number, asking details as the date of installation of the said numbers, installation address of the above numbers, whether the number is owned by business, ownership details documents submitted before installation and if its been operational / functional till date.

This was due to the fact on record of MCGM the said area is declared as Residence incompltete with no property / assessment tax levied.The lease papers and registration dates back to 2010, and a nursing home function with no record found with the local health department.

The APIO MTNL, vide dat 19/09/2017, replied stating the information relates to personal information of third party, the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest. the APIO states, had communicated for consent from the third party under section 11(1) of RTI act 2005 and since third party has objection for disclosing any such information, therfore the information sought can not be disclosed under RTI act 8(1)j of 2005.


Please suggest if the above is a personal information sought, as the MTNL itself publishes directory with detailed information, but additional query sought by me was date of installation and the documents furnished for installation, which is generally asked by MTNL.

can such documents be denied and was a communication for consent necessary from the owner of the said landline.

Thanks for your advise.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 answer to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0
Prasad GLN

SPIO word is not final.  Go for first appeal and to second appeal and let CIC decide the issue.

The information solicited was details incorporated in Land line application to MTNL, which is not confidential or personal information.  CPIO denying information is not justified.  Irrespective of third party comments final decision is that of CPIO.  When the Public record is not third party information, there is no point in seeking third party's comments.  There is no purpose in having Directory inquiry number if that information is personal in nature.

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.

Answer this question...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  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.

  • Tell a friend

    Love RTI INDIA- Online RTI? Tell a friend!
  • Members

    No members to show

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
    • Total Posts
  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Create New...

Important Information

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