Response on 'Withelding information by PIO, Indian Army citing reason as third party information'

**Sumit.Jha** · 02-09-2009, 02:57 PM

According to rules, Indian Army Officers of the Rank of Brigadiers and above are required to take prior approval from competent authority of Indian Army, if they wish to join employment within two years of retirement. One particular Officer, who retired as Brigadier, joined employment the next day of his retirement. It is highly unlikely to get the above mentioned approval from the Army authorities within 24 hours of retirement.

I applied to the PIO, Indian Army under RTI Act, 2005 and sought information on "Whether the person took prior approval from competent authority of Indian Army or not". However, i did not get the information and am reproducing their PIO's reply below:-

"The information sought is of third party, having no relationship to any public authority, is exempted from provisioning under Sec 8 (1) (j) of the RTI Act, 2005. In addition, said information is held with MS Branch on behalf of MoD in the fiduciary relationship and is exempted from provisioning under sec 81(1)(e) of the RTI Act, 2005.

Now, I want members' guidance and views on three major issues:

1. I doubt if there is any section named Sec81 (1) (e) in the RTI, Act, 2005.

2. I am not asking about personal information of any person, neither am asking about his professional activities. Since according to rules, these officers are required to take prior approval, not seeking prior approval is against Army rules, I am only asking to know whether the person took army's prior approval before joining his employment or not. Therefore, I am asking to know about a procedure which every Officer of this rank has to follow, not only the Officer in question. Also, not taking prior approval can have multi-dimensional bearings on national security. In this case, can it be construed as information sought is of third party, therefore exempted under RTI Act and so can't be given?

3. Does their answer comply Sec 8(1) (j)? Is it true that my question is invasion of privacy of any individual? Because in any case, seeking prior approval is required under Army rules, i think not seeking approval may attract punishment.

An early response shall be highly appreciated and would also help me in filling appeal to the concerned appellate authority.

Thanks & Regards

Sumit New Delhi

Similar Threads which you may be interested into:

**RAVEENA_O** · 02-09-2009, 03:16 PM

Sponsorer

Sumit,

Originally Posted by Sumit.Jha

1. I doubt if there is any section named Sec81 (1) (e) in the RTI, Act, 2005.

2. I am not asking about personal information of any person, neither am asking about his professional activities. Since according to rules, these officers are required to take prior approval, not seeking prior approval is against Army rules, I am only asking to know whether the person took army's prior approval before joining his employment or not. Therefore, I am asking to know about a procedure which every Officer of this rank has to follow, not only the Officer in question. Also, not taking prior approval can have multi-dimensional bearings on national security. In this case, can it be construed as information sought is of third party, therefore exempted under RTI Act and so can't be given?

3. Does their answer comply Sec 8(1) (j)? Is it true that my question is invasion of privacy of any individual? Because in any case, seeking prior approval is required under Army rules, i think not seeking approval may attract punishment.

(1) There is no section 81(1)(e). It may be Section-8(1)(e) - information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship....

(2) I don't have the test of your request to CPIO. You were to ask the Copy of permission granted to Mr................... (details of design, rank, staff no. etc) This information by all means is in public domain and accessible under RTI Act. It is not an information submitted by the retired officer to take the plea of - available in fiduciary relationship and deny under sec-8(1)(e). Since the document asked for is supposed to be a communication issued by PA, it is also not a personal information, which can be denied under sec.8(1)(j). It is also not a third party information since the permission was (supposed to be) issued by Indian Army - a public authority.

(3) I hope you have not asked any question. CPIO is not under obligation to answer queries. If you have asked for copy of permission, CPIO is not justified in rejecting the information.

The information you asked (copy of permission granted to Mr....) is in public domain and CPIO is not justified to reject it under Sec-8 & 9.

If the information pertains to another PA of same organisation, it is the duty of CPIO to transfer your application to that concerned CPIO

Please prefer FIRST APPEAL before FAA immediately stating above aspects.

**colnrkurup** · 02-09-2009, 05:02 PM

Dear Ravi,
Firstly 81(1)(e) is too conspicuous a typing error. It is not worth persuing that issue.Secondly please do not fall into the trap of arguement on 8(1)(e) etc., in this case. I suggest you make a fresh RTI application seeking the same information in a diferent ways on general terms like

(a) Norms set and procedure followed and the accountability by Army HQs to ensure that no officer of the rank of Brigadiers and above take up civil reemployment within two years of their retirement without prior sanction of competent authorityas laid down in .............. Certified copy of orders if any exist be providedetc., etc.,

(b) Is Army HQs or the concerned authority responsible is aware of any case of violation of above statutory provision by any officers of the rank of Brigadier and above occurred within last ------months (put a suitable period) etc., etc etc.,

The above is only a guide line. You have to make an excellent application taking assistance from RTI expert. You may post a draft in this forum. Please do not waste an year in first and second appeal with your existing application when you can corner them within a month.

**RAVEENA_O** · 02-09-2009, 06:45 PM

Thank you for your advise at #3

I have only given pointwise answer to Sumit's posting at #1.

What is harm in preferring an appeal?

Preferring umpteen number of RTI Requests are always available at our free-will. The object must be to get what we want and not to put CPIO in trouble.

CPIOs are not under statutory obligation to answer queries but are only required to supply information in material form. Therefore raising query would not help Sumit.

The norms are known to us which is applicable to Civil as well as Defence Officials.

Sumit is interested to know about a particular person. It would therefore be easy to seek copy of permission granted to Mr.................. for accepting civil employment after retirement so as to enable CPIO to supply copy of permission letter or say that no permission is sought or granted.

**Sumit.Jha** · 02-10-2009, 08:02 PM

Dear Ravi,
Thanks for taking time out to guide me on the issue. I had asked the CPIO the following:
"I seek information under the RTI Act, 2005 to know whether Brigadier (Retired) Mr. ABC took prior approval from relevant army authority to join commercial employment or not."

I have removed his name from the above text, hope you can understand. Now, according to your reply, it seems i made a mistake of not asking for a copy of the approval granted to Mr. ABC. So, now what should i do. In appeal to FAA, Can I ask for a copy or I can't ask for a copy now. Then there is another question that if i file a new application to same CPIO for a copy of approval, would that not be treated as misusing RTI by CPIO since he is already averse to provide me with info required.

Thanks & Regards

Sumit