CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2011/000716/12484
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2011/000716
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Anup Narain Gaur
76, Hargobind Enclave,
Vikas Marg Extension, New Delhi.
Respondent : Ms. Neena Kumari
Public Information Officer & Dy. Director,
Directorate of Education, GNCTD
Office of the Deputy Director of Education,
District North West(A), B.L. Block,
Shalimarg Bagh, Delhi – 110083.
RTI application filed on : 26/10/2010 PIO replied : 27/11/2010 First appeal filed on : 18/12/2010 First Appellate Authority order : 11/01/2011 Second Appeal received on : 10/03/2011 Notice of Hearing sent on : 21/04/2011 Hearing held on : 24/05/2011 Information sought by the appellant:
RTI regarding of Ms. Rekha Gaur (TGT) and her ID-19935264, Teacher in Govt. Girls Sr. Sec. School
(Sch 1D-1309023), Shalimar Village, Delhi – 110088.
1. As per office attendance records, whether Ms. Rekha Gaur was present in office on following dates and
as per format given below:
Date Nature and Duration of leave Reason for absence from office (Tour or
availed. any other, to be specified in each
case)
05/09/2005
12/09/2005
06/12/2005
17/01/2006
02/02/2006
06/02/2006
22/02/2006
18/04/2006
27/04/2006
05/07/2006 to 06/07/2006
01/11/2006 to 04/11/2006
15/12/2006 to 25/12/2006
17/01/2008
11/04/2008
2. Details of savings declared for the purpose of Sec 80 C and exemption claimed in respect of house rent
allowance u/s-10 of Income tax Act, 1961 during the last four financial years i.e. 2006-07, 2007-08,
2008-09 and 2009-10.
3. Names and Details of dependents declared by Ms. Rekha Gaur during the last eight calendar years i.e.
2002 to 2010 and effective date/s of inclusion/change in dependent list, if any.
4. Date of application for availing LTC/LLTC(availed during 25/09/2006 to 05/10/2006).
5. Did she avail the above LTC/LLTC for herself alone or for herself and her daughter?
6. Date of application for availing Medical Facility (Medical Benefit).
PIO Reply:
In this connection as it is informed that Ms. Rekha Gaur has filed the objections to provide the
information. She has also made a request that the information may not be provided to the applicant
belong her personal details to harm/treat/ terrify her and her daughter which has no public interest.
She has also stated that it is invasion in the privacy of the person. Moreover a case is also pending in
the Court the copy of objection / application of Rekha Gaur is attached herewith.
In view of the above, the information sought for can not be provided as per provisions od section 8(1)(c)
(g)&(j) of RTI Act.
Grounds of the First Appeal:
Provided information is unsatisfactory, incorrect and incomplete.
Order of the FAA:
The appeal was received on 20/12/10 filed by Mr. Anup Narain Gaur. The hearing was held on 11/1/11.
Mrs. Neena Kumari, PIO/DDE(NW-A) was present. Mr. Anup Narain Gaur, appellant, was also present.
The undersigned has examined the original application of the applicant, status report, information
provided by the PIO and grounds of the appeal.
Ground of the Second Appeal:
Incomplete and misleading information has provided by the PIO.
Point 2 to 6 PIO has denied the information sought for on the grounds of baseless risk and apprehensions
raised by Rekha Gaur herself.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Appellant : Mr. Anup Narain Gaur;
Respondent : Ms. Neena Kumari, Public Information Officer & Dy. Director;
The PIO has provided some of the information. The PIO has not given information on queries 2, 3,
4, 5 & 6 on the ground that the third party Ms. Rekha Gaur has raised an objection. The Commission
agrees that details of savings and her claim for House Rent Allowance in Income Tax are personal
information disclosing which would amount an unwarranted invasion on the privacy. Hence these are
protected under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. However, details sought in query 3, 4, 5 & 6 cannot be
claimed to be information which would be covered by the exemption under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act.
This is not information which can be construed as invasion on the privacy of an individual.
Decision:
The Appeal is allowed.
The PIO is directed to provide information on queries 3, 4, 5 & 6 to the appellant
before 05 June 2011.
This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
Any information in compliance with this Order will be provided free of cost as per Section 7(6) of RTI Act.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
24 May 2011
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (MC)