In the Central Information Commission
at
New Delhi
File No. CIC/AD/A/2011/001742
Date of Hearing : October 21, 2011
Date of Decision : October 21, 2011
Parties: (Heard through videoconference)
Appellant
Shri Ram Narayan
S/o late Shri Ramnath,
GramKathori, PostLauda,
District Chandauli
U.P.
The Appellant was present.
Respondents
East Central Railway
Mugalsarai
Represented by: Shri Mahendra Prasad, DPO & PIO and Shri L.K. Rai, OS(RTI Cell).
Information Commissioner : Mrs. Annapurna Dixit
___________________________________________________________________
In the Central Information Commission
at
New Delhi
File No: CIC/AD/A/2011/001742
ORDER
Background
1. The Applicant filed his RTIapplication dated 27.01.2011 with the PIO, East Central Railway,
Mugalsarai, seeking following information in respect of the benefits given to the family of late Shri
Ganesh, who served the public authority as Khalasi Helper, by the public authority:
“1. Copy of the document, showing the total amount paid to the wife (Smt. Sita Devi) of the
deceased employee.
2. Copy of the pension payment order.
3. Copies of all the documents, including service book, related to the compassionate
appointment given to the son of the deceased employee.
4. Whether the above deceased employee has left any minor son/daughter, personal house,
and land behind him.”
2. The PIO, vide his communication dated 01.03.2011, declined the disclosure of the above information
to the Applicant citing exemption under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTIAct. The Applicant thereafter filed
his 1stappeal dated 23.03.2011with the Appellate Authority (AA) against deemed refusal of his RTI
request since the said reply of the PIO had not reached him by this time. This appeal, however, was
not apparently decided by the AA. The Appellant, therefore, filed the present petition dated
01.07.2011 before the Commission alleging that the PIO has furnished “wrong and misleading
information to him after 88 days”. He, therefore, demanded that the penal action be initiated against
the PIO.
Decision
3. During the hearing, the Appellant stated that he is not happy with the decision of the public authority
giving appointment to the son of the third party (deceased employee) on compassionate grounds and
that, therefore, he has demanded the present set of information. The Appellant’s request for
information (para 1) was accordingly discussed as given below:
Item Nos. 1, 2 & 4:
4. In the light of the Appellant’s submission, I am entirely in agreement with the PIO that the information
sought by the Appellant here is purely personal to the thirdparty, disclosure of which does not serve
any public interest. It is accordingly directed that there shall be no disclosure obligation on the
Respondents with regard to these items of information.
Item No. 3:
5. Here the Appellant has requested for copies of documents related to the appointment given to the
son of the deceased employee(third Party) on compassionate grounds including copy of service
record.
It has been the Commission’s decisions that the information, which deals with the appointment of a
person in a public authority, cannot be construed as personal to that appointee since it relates to the
functioning of the public authority. However, the information such as deductions made in the salary;
details of Provident Fund; nomination details, etc. are indeed personal to an employee which attracts
exemption under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTIAct.
In view of the above, it is directed that the PIO shall furnish information against point 3 to the
Appellant after excising from it the portion(s), under Section 10(1) of the RTIAct), which are exempt
under Section 8(1)(j) of the Act. The information should be furnished to the Appellant within 2 weeks
of receipt of this order.
6. Appeal is disposed of with the above directions.
(Annapurna Dixit)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy
(G.Subramanian)
Deputy Registrar
Cc:
1. Shri Ram Narayan
S/o late Shri Ramnath,
GramKathori, PostLauda,
District Chandauli
U.P.
2. The Appellate Authority (RTI) &
Additional Divisional Railway Manager
East Central Railway
Mugalsarai
U.P.
3. Public Information Officer
Sr. Divisional Personnel Manager
East Central Railway
Mugalsarai
U.P.
4. Officer in charge, NIC
Note: In case, the Commission’s above directives have not been complied with by the Respondents, the Appellant
may file a formal complaint with the Commission under Section 18(1) of the RTIAct, giving (1) copy of RTI
application, (2) copy of PIO’s reply, (3) copy of the decision of the first Appellate Authority, (4) copy of the
Commission’s decision, and (5) any other documents which he/she considers to be necessary for deciding the
complaint. In the prayer, the Appellant may indicate, what information has not been provided.