Blog Archives

Why there is no service book for 2.69 lakhs Government Employees?

Gramin Dak SevaksWhen an RTI applicant asked for the Service book of Postal Gramin Dak Sevaks (GDS) employees, he got the response that there is no service book maintained for the GDS employees. The CPIO informed that “no service book is maintained for GDS as they are part time workers”, although the Hon’ble Supreme Court have held that Gramin Dak Sevaks are holders of civil post outside the regular civil service. As per the Government rules, there is no parity in terms and conditions of employment between the Central Government regular employees and Gramin Dak Sevaks.

The Government treats Gramin Dak Sevaks and regular employees of the Government to two distinct and separate groups. Whereas Government employee works for 8 hours, Gramin Dak Sevak work on a part time basis ranging from three hours to five hours per day and are discharged after attaining 65 years of age. If you have any questions, you can post it over our forums hereRead more ›




Give opportunity of hearing during appeal

Hearing during second appealCentral Information Commission in one of the decision opined that “as far as possible give the appellant including the third party, if any, an opportunity of hearing specially if he so requests, without forgetting that the essence of RTI Act is to provide complete, correct and timely information to the appellant.” You can read the RTI Act here!

CIC further states that “It is needless to say that rendering an opportunity of hearing to the parties is a fundamental principle of jurisprudence. It is conducive to fairness and transparency and accords with the principles of natural justice. An opportunity of hearing to the parties also brings greater clarity to the adjudicating authorities.” Read more ›




Information cannot be denied on mere pendency of investigation

pendency of investigationMere pendency of investigation / enquiry is not sufficient justification by itself for withholding the information. It must be shown by the Central Public Information Officer  (CPIO) that the disclosure of the information would ‘impede’ or even on a lesser threshold ‘hamper’ or ‘interfere’ with the enquiry.

The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in its decision dated 03/12/2007 [WP(C) 3114/2007, Bhagat Singh Vs. CIC & Anrs] has held as under:-

“13. Access to information, under Section 3 of the Act, is the rule and exemptions under Section 8, the exception. Section 8 being a restriction on this fundamental right, must therefore is to be strictly construed. It should not be interpreted in manner as to shadow the very right itself. Under Section 8, exemption from releasing information is granted if it would impede the process of investigation or the prosecution of the offenders.

It is apparent that the mere existence of an investigation process cannot be a ground for refusal of the information; the authority withholding information must show satisfactory reasons as to why the release of such information would hamper the investigation process. Such reasons should be germane, and the opinion of the process being hampered should be reasonable and based on some material. Sans this consideration, Section 8(1)(h) and other such provisions would become a haven for dodging demands for information.”

Read more ›




Post Office cannot sell IPO through RTI

Indian Postal OrderIn an RTI filed with Post office at Bihar, an RTI applicant has asked CPIO to supply 100 Indian Postal Orders (IPO) of Rs 10/- each. It was denied by the Post office, and the matter went up to Central Information Commission (CIC). CIC decided that RTI Act does not casts any obligation on the CPIO to supply IPOs which are products available for sale at post offices. The CPIO, under the RTI Act, is required to furnish only information/documents as available on record. Thus the RTI applicant was informed that he can purchase IPOs from any Post Office.

Earlier CPIO has contended that “This request for supply of IPOs through RTI does not fall within the definition of “information” as per Section 2(f) of the RTI Act.” Thus the CPIO has not provided the desired information and returned the banker’s cheque filed along with the RTI application. If you have any questions regarding Right to Information, you can post your query at our forum here!

Post Office cannot sell IPO through RTI

We have compiled comprehensive information about IPO’s at our sister site NationalConcerns.com here: What is Indian Postal Order

What is Indian Postal Order?
A service for remitting small amount of money from one place to another through Post Offices. Indian Postal Orders provide a convenient means of transmitting small sums of money by post. The Indian Postal Orders are available in all the Post Offices across India

What details are to be written on the IPO?

IPO has two parts as a cheque has. Counterfoil & Foil. Foil part is sent/handed over to payee as money remittance & counter foil is kept by the remitter as a proof

You need to fill in:

  • Name of the Payee (person to whom the payment is to be made)
  • Office of Payment (Post Office which is most convenient to the Payee. If not known then district, town or city maybe specified. It is not mandatory to put this in, but is useful if the IPO is lost)

Also fill in the same details on the counterfoil. Tear the counterfoil and keep it, before you submit the IPO with the application. Read more ›




What satisfaction must be arrived at prior to disclosure of information to third party?

disclosure of information to third party

disclosure of information to third party

If the profile of the person seeking Information, in light of other attending circumstances, leads to the construction that under the pretext of serving public interest, such person is aiming to settle personal score against the third party, it cannot be said that public interest warrants disclosure of information to third party. The Public Information Officer under Right to Information Act, while dealing with the information relating to or supplied by the third party, has to constantly bear in mind that the RTI Act does not become a tool in the hands of a busy body to settle a personal score.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court vide decision dated 13/12/20012 Bihar Public Service Commission vs. Sayyed Hussain Abbas Rizvi & Anr [Civil appeal No. 9052 of 2012] has held that clause 8(1)(g) can come into play with any kind of relationship. It requires that where the disclosure of such information which would endanger the life or physical safety of any person or identify the source of information or assistance given in confidence for law enforcement or security purpose, the information need not be provided. In other words if in the opinion of the concerned authority there is danger to life or possibility of danger to physical safety, the CPIO would be entitled to bring such case within the exemption of Section 8(1)(g) of the RTI Act.

Husband (RTI Applicant) has filed several RTI applications with the BSNL seeking various information relating to Lady employee of BNSL with whom he appears to have a matrimonial dispute and in response to communications to her by the CPIO under Section 11 of the RTI Act, she has objected to the disclosure stating that the information is of personal nature, does not involve any public activity or interest and would cause unwarranted invasion of her privacy. She has also contended that the appellant, who asserts himself to be her husband, has criminal intent and there is a threat to her physical safety, she has claimed exemption under Section 8 (1) (g) of the RTI Act. Read more ›




Meet RTI Activist