RTI India Join Big Helpers! Donate to RTI India!


Welcome to the RTI India: The complete Online Portal for Right to Information in India.

Right to Information has an important economic dimension, as it embraces not only political freedom but also the freedom to lead a life with dignity, unfettered by domination and discrimination.

Our aim is to provide authentic and analytical help regarding Right to Information in India to Officers, Lawyers, Citizens, RTI Activist, Associations, & NGO's. Our strength is in bringing them all at one platform.

Join RTI India!

Service matter which benefit the seeker in court doesnot serve public interest

This is a discussion on Service matter which benefit the seeker in court doesnot serve public interest within the Appeals & decisions forums, part of the RTI News, Circulars and Decisions category; Central Information Commission Decision No.292/IC(A)/2006 F. No. CIC /MA/A/2006/00588 Dated, the 21st September, 2006 Name of the Appellant : Sh. Sharabh Dubey, 11/7 Civil Lines, Kanpur –208 001. (U.P.) Name ...


RTI India Official Toolbar
New Thread
Go Back   RTI India > RTI News, Circulars and Decisions > Appeals & decisions

89396 Webpages

Register Tags Members List Mark Forums Read
Notices

  #1  
Old 09-27-2006, 12:31 AM
kushal's Avatar
Name: Kushal Pathak

 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: New Delhi
Posts: 1,969
Rep Power: 48
kushal has much to be proud ofkushal has much to be proud ofkushal has much to be proud ofkushal has much to be proud ofkushal has much to be proud ofkushal has much to be proud ofkushal has much to be proud ofkushal has much to be proud ofkushal has much to be proud ofkushal has much to be proud ofkushal has much to be proud of
Service matter which benefit the seeker in court doesnot serve public interest

Central Information Commission


Decision No.292/IC(A)/2006
F. No.CIC/MA/A/2006/00588

Dated, the 21st September, 2006

  • Name of the Appellant : Sh. Sharabh Dubey, 11/7 Civil Lines, Kanpur –208 001. (U.P.)
  • Name of the Public Authority: The British India Corporation Limited, 14/136 Civil Lines, P.B. 77, Kanpur-208 001.
DECISION

Facts of the Case:
  1. The appellant is an employee of the respondent. He was transferred to another Unit of the company. The office order was challenged by him in the Court, which adjudicated on the matter. Subsequently, he has filed a few more petitions on service related matters in the Court. In this backdrop, he has sought documents relating to the legal opinion obtained by the respondent, file notings by the senior officials on the issue of transfer, letters/correspondence with other officials, etc.
  2. The CPIO has denied the information and sought exemption u/s 8(1)(d) & (g) of the Act.
  3. The case was heard on 12.9.06. The appellant could not be present. The CPIO and the appellate authority were present. In the course of hearing, the CPIO showed a copy of the petition filed by the appellant in the Court, whic hcontained almost all the documents asked for by him. The CPIO contended that the documents asked for by the appellant relate to the various petitions filed by him in the Court. He, therefore, pleaded that the disclosure of the documents might adversely affect the disputed cases. Hence, the relevant documents are treated as confidential.

Commission’s Decision:
  1. There is a dispute between the appellant and the company on service matters, including transfer of the appellant to another unit. The matter is pending before the Court for adjudication. There is every possibility that the appellant would get opportunity for his effective defense. The information sought is in the interest of the seeker. And, as such, there is no overriding public interest, u/s 8(1)(j) of the Act, for disclosure of the information.
  2. The appeal is therefore dismissed.

Sd/-
(Prof. M.M. Ansari)
Information Commissioner
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 01-05-2008, 06:15 PM
Just can't stay Away

 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 322
Rep Power: 4
taurus is on a distinguished road
Re: Service matter which benefit the seeker in court doesnot serve public interest

I doubt very much whether the exemption under sec 8(1)(j) could be invoked in a case where the information sought for pertains to one's own - that is when the information-seeker asks for some information pertaining to himself! In that case he cannot be blamed for invading into his own privacy. Many times such confusing stand is taken. Sec 8(1)(j) comes into play only when an information-seeker asks for an information concerning a third person and such information is likely to invade the privacy of that third person. I dont think any information can be denied branding that the information sought is in the interest of the seeker and no public interest is involved.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 08-03-2008, 08:26 PM
Name: vijendra singh
Quite a regular

 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: meerut
Age: 53
Posts: 162
Rep Power: 2
vijendra singh is on a distinguished road
Re: Service matter which benefit the seeker in court doesnot serve public interest

Decision of CIC may not be correct.

Last edited by ganpat1956; 08-06-2008 at 07:48 PM.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 08-06-2008, 09:16 AM
Name: vijendra singh
Quite a regular

 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: meerut
Age: 53
Posts: 162
Rep Power: 2
vijendra singh is on a distinguished road
Re: Service matter which benefit the seeker in court doesnot serve public interest

Information seeker is is part of public. Hence his interest should also be considered as public interest.

Last edited by ganpat1956; 08-06-2008 at 07:48 PM.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 08-22-2008, 09:04 PM
Just can't stay Away

 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Age: 46
Posts: 303
Rep Power: 8
mpai is a jewel in the roughmpai is a jewel in the roughmpai is a jewel in the roughmpai is a jewel in the rough
Re: Service matter which benefit the seeker in court doesnot serve public interest

Quote:
Originally Posted by vijendra singh View Post
Decision of CIC may not be correct.
The decision is correct. CIC cannot go against the decision of the Supreme Court of India. This may have been discussed during or after the hearing, but not mentioned in the decision. For the interest of this list members, the Supreme Court had ruled that transfer was a part of Government Service, to the staff member who had been transfered is supposed to join the new place of posting first and then later on, he should represent against it. Only if this representation fails, he should approach court.

We always know that when Government Staff members are caught by the CBI / ACB and other organizations, the first thing that the Head of the Dept. does is transfer the staff member. The staff member in turn approaches court and gets a stay on this transfer. This has been going on for years, hence the harsh ruling by the Supreme Court.

Best wishes

Manoj
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 08-23-2008, 09:43 PM
Name: vijendra singh
Quite a regular

 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: meerut
Age: 53
Posts: 162
Rep Power: 2
vijendra singh is on a distinguished road
Re: Service matter which benefit the seeker in court doesnot serve public interest

CIC observed that appellant demanded the info for using in his defence. Law of natural justice says that alleged party must be given every oppurtunity of defence. Moreover , info on transfer cases can not be denied. Moreover , the appellant had the info with him already. In view of all above ,PIO can not deny the info.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 08-26-2008, 07:40 AM
Name: shrigopal
Just Popping In

 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: ajmer
Age: 43
Posts: 31
Rep Power: 1
revribhav is on a distinguished road
Re: Service matter which benefit the seeker in court doesnot serve public interest

The difference between law and justice is marked here.
I have got a stay against my employer insurance company who transferred me to a post in which I was neither employed nor promoted.Under the RTI act they sometimes say my previous post continues ,however other times they state that post has been changed.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 08-26-2008, 10:32 PM
Just can't stay Away

 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 322
Rep Power: 4
taurus is on a distinguished road
Re: Service matter which benefit the seeker in court doesnot serve public interest

This is a very old decision. Subsequently the CIC in a full bench decision dated 23.04.2007, has clarified the ambit of Sec 8(1)(j) nicely as follows: "This Section has to be read as a whole. If that were done, it would be apparent that that “personal information” does not mean information relating to the information seeker, but about a third party. That is why, in the Section, it is stated “unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual”. If one were to seek information about himself or his own case, the question of invasion of
privacy of his own self does not arise. If one were to ask information about a third
party and if it were to invade the privacy of the individual, the information
seeker can be denied the information on the ground that disclosure would
invade the privacy of a third party. Therefore, when a citizen seeks information
about his own case and as long as the information sought is not exempt in terms
of other provisions of Section 8 of RTI Act, this Section cannot be applied to
deny the information."
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to taurus For This Useful Post:
kushal (08-26-2008)
  #9  
Old 09-03-2008, 02:25 PM
Name: rajendra bakre
Quite a regular

 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: nagpur
Posts: 107
Rep Power: 2
rajub is on a distinguished road
Re: Service matter which benefit the seeker in court doesnot serve public interest

I think IC erred on a vital law point.

The RTI Act specifically states that applicant need not give any reason for information sought.

The PIO/AA or IC should only decide whether the information is exempted under the Act.

To determine the exemption of the information the authority can not argue that the applicant will be using the information in a particular manner and hence falls under any exemption clause. The information can be exempted only if it absolutely falls under any exempt category.

In this case a diametrically opposite order has been passed by Kerala HC, wherein it was held that employee has every right to get information about service matters.

The HC decision is available here

http://www.rtiindia.org/directory/up...a-bank-case-6/
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to rajub For This Useful Post:
taurus (09-04-2008), vijendra singh (09-03-2008)
  #10  
Old 09-03-2008, 08:44 PM
Name: vijendra singh
Quite a regular

 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: meerut
Age: 53
Posts: 162
Rep Power: 2
vijendra singh is on a distinguished road
Re: Service matter which benefit the seeker in court doesnot serve public interest

Actually some I.Cs are delivering fair decisions on appeals ;while others are writing decisions without applying their mind. I.Cs are neither accountable , nor punishable ; hence this is the appellant who has to be in trouble afterwards. You said rightly that PIO or I.C cannot deny the info if not exemted u/s 8 or 9.

Last edited by ganpat1956; 09-03-2008 at 10:25 PM.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
act, court, service matter


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

 
Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Forum Jump

Similar Threads for: Service matter which benefit the seeker in court doesnot serve public interest

Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How To Harass An Information Seeker ? colnrkurup RTI General Discussions 10 08-03-2008 10:11 PM
Court Martial proceedings a public activity,CIC to Defence Min karira RTI News & Discussion 2 02-05-2008 07:59 AM
Few doctors from reserved category serve Parliamentarians sidmis RTI News & Discussion 3 10-16-2007 12:34 AM
Australia: When Does The Public Interest Require FOI Fees To Be Waived? ganpat1956 International RTI's 0 09-14-2007 08:09 PM
Foreign Service Term Eligibility in service more than 25 years sant2000 Ask for RTI Query 3 01-16-2007 08:08 PM


Copyrights

New to Site?

Need Help?

Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.2.0 Web Technologies by Dr. Kushal Pathak

All times are GMT +5.5. The time now is 10:21 PM.



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42