CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
.....
F.No.CIC/AT/A/2008/00350
Dated, the 24th July, 2008.
Appellant : Shri D.K. Mishra
Respondents : Directorate General of Income Tax (Vigilance)
This matter came up for hearing on 16.07.2008 pursuant to Commission’s
hearing notice dated 30.05.2008. Appellant was present in person, while the
respondents were represented by Shri S.S. Bhadoriya, Deputy Director of Income
Tax (Vigilance).
2. At the outset, the appellant stated that the plea taken by the respondents
that the information requested by him could not be disclosed due to exemptions
under Sections 8(1)(g) and 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act was totally academic as most
information including note-sheets in this matter has already been supplied to him
by the same respondents. The disinclination to divulge the balance identical
information is, therefore, curious.
3. Commission noted that the contention of the Appellate Authority that the
requested information could not be disclosed in view of exemptions under the
above-mentioned Sections as endorsed by Commission’s decision in the Deepak
J. Mehta case (03.01.2007), is no doubt quite valid. However, the Commission
cannot also ignore the fact that at the behest of the respondents themselves,
substantial information has already been disclosed to the appellant. CPIO, who
was present for the hearing, acknowledged this fact.
4. In view of the above, it is noted that this particular case stands on a
different footing from the previous similar cases decided by the Commission.
Respondents have disclosed a part of a given set of information without claiming
exemption and now claim that the balance should not be disclosed to the
appellant. The exemption-Sections quoted by them would have been applicable
to the entire range of information. Now that a large part of this information has
been disclosed without invoking the exemption-Sections, it does not stand to
reason as to why the balance, and acknowledgedly even less sensitive
information than the previous one already disclosed, should be withheld from
disclosure under the exemption-Sections cited.
5. In view of the above, it is directed that the respondents, within 3 weeks
from the date of the receipt of this order, on a day and time to be intimated to the
appellant, shall allow him to inspect the documents and files related to his
Page 1 of 2
RTI-query. Appellant shall be allowed to take such copies, including certified
copies, as he may wish on payment of fee and further-fee representing the cost to
be determined by the respondents.
6. The appeal is disposed of with these directions.
7. Copy of this decision be sent to the parties.
Sd/-
( A.N. TIWARI )
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER
Authenticated by –
Sd/-
( D.C. SINGH )
Under Secretary & Asst. Registrar
Page 2 of 2