Interesting decision of the CIC.....concerning DDCA

[karira]

Recently, the CIC has given a very interesting decision in a matter relating to "sale of tickets and complimentary tickets given by DDCA for International Cricket Matches held at Feroz Shah Kotla grounds".
(Actual motive was regarding "duplicate" tickets)

It is interesting to see how the applicant has rebutted each and every argument put forward by the PIO/AA and the Third Party in a very interesting manner. It is quite evident that both the PA and the Third Party were totally against disclosure of information and inspection of files.

The full decision is attached.

I am highlighting and summarizing a few matters raised in the case and the decision/comments of the CIC and appellant (in blue):

1. Application made to Dept. of Entertainment Tax for details of sold tickets, unsold tickets and complimentary tickets for matches.

2. The PA claims that DDCA is a "third party" and does not want information to be disclosed since it will hurt its "commercial interests"
Applicant says that DDCA has a monopoly to conduct matches and sell tickets, therefore question of "competetion" and "commercial interests" does not arise

3. Third Party (DDCA) contends that the applicant is a member of DDCA so he can ask for the information from DDCA itself
Applicant contends that even if he is a member of DDCA, he is a citizen and therefore, has right to apply for information.

4. Third Party (DDCA) contends that "seating plan" and tickets carry seat numbers and therefore any disclosure will reveal seating plans and thus will endanger public safety
Applicant replies that seat numbers are printed on each and every ticket and therefore information is already in the Public Domain

5. DDCA says that disclosure is not relating to public interest
Applicant says that sale of tickets is to the general public and therefore this activity is definitely in public interest. Also international matches conducted on public grounds are public events.

CIC upheld the Second Appeal with the proviso that copies of tickets cannot be given because they can be used for creating "duplicate" tickets in future.

[colnrkurup]

May I seek a clarification in one of the above aspects. Certain SIC also has been dismissing the appeals adding that "there is no public interest involved" or " subject matter involve the very same question of law and an out and out personal information with no public interest at all " as an addition plea. This imply that according to CIC/SIC,the RTI Act can be used only for public interest and not seeking " out and out personal information". I could not find any such provision in the Act. Can any one clarify this issue please ?