In the Central Information Commission
at
New Delhi
File No. CIC/AD/A/2011/001963
Date of Hearing : October 25, 2011
Date of Decision : October 25, 2011
Parties:
Appellant
Shri Arun Kumar
SA1, (PSS), 64 D,
Parliament House, Parliament of India,
New Delhi
The Appellant was not present.
Respondents
Government of NCT of Delhi
Office of the Medical Superintendent
Bhagwan Mahavir Hospital
Pitampura
New Delhi
Represented by: Dr. Suman Kumari, CMO, Dr. Surender Pal, DMS and Dr. Ashok Kumr Dang, M.S.
Information Commissioner : Mrs. Annapurna Dixit
___________________________________________________________________
In the Central Information Commission
at
New Delhi
File No: CIC/AD/A/2011/001963
ORDER
Background
1. The Applicant filed his RTIapplication dated 06.05.2011 with the PIO, Bhagwan Mahavir Hospital,
GNCTD, Delhi, seeking information against 17 items (such as, present posting; salary details;
educational certificate property returns; LTC bills; bank Account details etc.) in respect of Ms Sashi
Parbha, an employee of the public authority. The PIO, on 06.09.2011, furnished all information to the
Applicant except information related to item nos. 5, 6, 11 and 12 since it was personal to the third
party. The Applicant thereafter field his 1stappeal with the Appellate Authority on 04.07.2011, which
apparently was not decided by the AA. The Appellant, thereafter, filed the present petition before the
Commission on 01.08.2011 requesting for the disclosure of information in respect of item nos. 5, 6,
11 & 12. He also alleged that the PIO had manipulated his reply in respect of item no. 16 of his RTI
application.
Decision
2. During the hearing, the Appellant’s RTIqueries (i. 5, 6, 11, 12 & 16) brought up in the present appeal
were discussed as given below:
Item No. 5:
3. The Appellant herein wants to obtain copies of educational certificate of the third party.
This variety of information is decidedly disclosable since on the basis of this very information a
person receives appointment in the public authority. The PIO is, therefore, directed to supply this
information to the Appellant by 25 November, 2011.
Item No. 6:
4. The Appellant herein has asked for the annual property returns of the third party.
I see no larger public interest being served in the present case which would warrant the disclosure of
this information. It is, therefore, directed that there shall be no disclosure obligation on the
Respondents with regard to this item.
Item No. 11 & 12:
5. The Appellant wants to obtain the details of the Bank account of the third party along with her PAN
number.
This is again purely a personal information to the third party, disclosure of which cannot be authorized
without any larger public interest, which the Appellant has failed to establish in the present case.
Item No. 16:
6. I see no reason to uphold the Appellant’s charge that the PIO has manipulated his answer. The PIO’s
reply was rather to the point.
7. Appeal is disposed of accordingly.
(Annapurna Dixit)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy
(G.Subramanian)
Deputy Registrar
Cc:
1. Shri Arun Kumar
SA1, (PSS), 64 D,
Parliament House, Parliament of India,
New Delhi
2. The Appellate Authority (RTI) &
Government of NCT of Delhi
Office of the Medical Superintendent
Bhagwan Mahavir Hospital
Pitampura
New Delhi
3. Public Information Officer &
Government of NCT of Delhi
Office of the Medical Superintendent
Bhagwan Mahavir Hospital
Pitampura
New Delhi
4. Officer in charge, NIC