RTI - Information on Disciplinary Proceedings (Against Central Excise Chief Commissioner) need not be provided by UPSC - HC
RESPONDENT, RK Jain wanted to inspect all the records relating to the proposed disciplinary action and/or imposition of penalty against Sri GS Narang, IRS of 1974 batch, with the UPSC. On being denied the information, he approached the Central Information Commission.
The CIC ruled that:[2011-TIOL-01-CIC]
++ Whatever records it (UPSC) holds in regard to this case will have to be disclosed because this cannot be classified as personal information merely on the ground that it concerns some particular officer.
++ Information regarding the disciplinary matters against any government employee cannot be withheld by claiming it to be personal information.
The Commission directed the UPSC to invite the Appellant on any mutually convenient date within 15 working days from the receipt of its order and to show him the relevant records in the possession of the UPSC for his inspection. After inspection, if he chooses to get the photocopies of some of those records, the CPIO shall provide the same free of cost.
UPSC was not prepared to part with the information and filed a writ petition in the Delhi High Court.
A Single Judge Bench of the Delhi High Court upheld the order of the CIC. []
The High Court (Single Judge) had observed,
The thrust of the legislation is to secure access to information under the control of public authorities in order to promote transparency and accountability in the working of every public authority, unless its disclosure is exempted under the Act. The access to information is considered vital to the functioning of a democracy, as it creates an informed citizenry. Transparency of information is considered vital to contain corruption and to hold Government and its instrumentalities accountable to the governed citizens of this country.
The UPSC was not relenting and took the matter in appeal to a Division Bench. The Division Bench in its judgement dated 6th November 2012, set aside the order of the Single Judge and CIC and allowed the appeal of the UPSC.
Recently, the Supreme Court in Girish Ramchandra Deshpande Vs. Central Information Commissioner reported as had held that, "The details disclosed by a person in his income tax returns are‘personal information' which stand exempted from disclosure under clause (j) of Section 8(1) of the RTI Act, unless involves a larger public interest and the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the Appellate Authority is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information.".
The High Court asked the respondent as to whether the present controversy was not squarely covered by the said recent dicta of the Supreme Court.
The counsel for the respondent argued that in the case before the Supreme Court the CIC itself had denied the information while in the present case CIC itself has allowed the information.
High Court found this irrelevant. In the light of the dicta of the Supreme Court and which if applicable to the facts of the present case is binding on this Bench, the Court was not required to go into the correctness or otherwise of the reasoning given by the Single Judge.
When the Court asked the counsel for the respondent as to what was the public interest in which the said personal information was sought, he replied by stating that an information seeker under the Act is not required to state the reasons for seeking the information.
So, the High Court followed the Supreme Court judgement and allowed the appeal of the UPSC.
Yet another piece of information goes into the vast chest of Government secrets!
We bring you this judgement today. Please see