Citation: Harsh Kumar v. Northern Rly in Appeal No.

CIC/VS/A/2015/001928
Compilation
of
employee
information
on

zonal

basis

The appellant sought the details of deductions made in his Provident fund and current balance. The
Railways denied him the information stating that they do not have a centralized information system for
the employees. The CIC directed the Railways to provide the information. Further, the CIC advised the
Railways to set up an information System, where an employee can access PF details for his entire career
by
entering
a
unique
employee
ID.
Comments
Many organisations compile information on a regional or zonal basis. A consolidated information system
would not only help the employees in keeping track of their PF balances and withdrawals, but would also
save the time and efforts of the public authority in compiling the records.
Citation: Rajvir Singh v. Delhi Transco Limited in Case No. CIC/SA/A/2015/001451
Missing log book
The appellant sought a copy of log book of an office vehicle. It was denied claiming that the log book
was missing and hence the copy could not be provided. The CIC noticed that the driver had claimed
about loss of log book after RTI application was filed and no action was taken against the driver for the
loss of log book. The Commission noticed that the Manager, HR had not taken any major initiative or
effort to trace the log book and conveniently facilitated the transfer of the driver, who had happily
escaped from any liability for the loss of log book. Holding that such an act indicated such suspicion that
office did not want to disclose the log book, the CIC issued a show cause to the PIO why maximum
penalty should not imposed against him for raising illegal defence of a missing log book. The CIC
awarded a compensation of Rs. 5000/- to the appellant for denying information.
1

Comments
Whenever a document is missing, action needs to be initiated immediately to trace it out. A public record
should be kept properly and responsibility should be fixed for any mislaid records.

Citation: Sunita Chopra v. Dte of Education (North), GNCTD in Case No. CIC/SA/A/2015/001934
Claim for maintenance
Appellant, a deserted wife, claimed inadequacy of maintenance from her husband. She sought the latest
salary slip of Shri Naresh Kumar Chopra, his residential address, copy of service book, latest GPF
statement, details of assets owned by him. She also sought name of nominee appointed by her husband
in GPF & Family Pension, group insurance schemes, CGHS, death & retirement gratuity etc. The PIO
denied information under section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act as it was personal information.
The CIC observed that certain documents like annual returns of assets, investments, IT returns etc were
earlier declared as private/ personal or third party information, as far as spouses are concerned they are
not private or personal or third party information between them, in the context of marital disputes
especially for maintenance purposes. The CIC ruled that the appellant is entitled to have access to the
salary related information but has no right to her husbands private information like deductions from
salary
Comments
Right to Information Act entitles an appellant to get even the personal information if there is
overwhelming public interest. In case the husband does not maintain his wife, a question arises whether
denial of such information challenges her right to live. If so, the information related to maintenance
2

becomes life related information.

Citation: Mr. Vipin Kumar Parashar v. North Western Rly in Appeal No. CIC/VS/A/2014/002894
Failure to provide the information
The appellant sought information pertaining to travelling status of a PNR number. No reply was given to
him. The appellant stated that he could not board the train because of rush When the case came up
before CIC, the respondent stated that the appellant had not travelled. The CIC directed to public
authority to provide the information to the appellant through nodal CPIO of the Railway Board. The CIC
admonished the First Appellate Authority for dereliction of duty and issued show cause notice to the
PIOs why penalty should not be imposed on them.
Comment
The RTI Act, 2005 prescribes a time limit for the PIO and the FAA to respond to the applicant. Failure to
reply to an applicant within the time limit laid down under the Act may invite the displeasure of the
Information Commission.
Citation: Shri R.J.Singh v. East Delhi Municipal Corporation in F. No.CIC/YA/A/2014/001340
Disclosure of information in relation to unauthorised construction and encroachment
Photocopy of entire case file of unauthorised construction of building was denied by the PIO, East Delhi
Municipal Corporation on ground of being third party information. In his initial reply, the PIO provided
contradictory information about whether the property has been sealed. The appellant stated that due to
unauthorised construction on the above mentioned property, extensive damage was caused to his
house. The respondent claimed that the sealing and de-sealing of any property is personal in nature. The
CIC observed that disclosure of information in relation to unauthorised construction and encroachment
3

does not require clearance from any third party. Looking into the circumstances of the case, the CIC
granted a compensation of Rs. 25,000/- to be paid to the appellant u/s 19(8) (b) of the RTI Act. Further,
a show cause notice was issued to the PIO as to why penalty should not be imposed on him u/s 20 RTI
Act, 2005 for outright deliberate denial of information.
Comments
Sealing and de-sealing of any property is a part of official work. In a number of cases, the CIC has ruled
that disclosure of information in relation to unauthorised construction of building and encroachment
cannot be said to be personal information of the third party and as such, disclosure in such cases do not
require clearance from any third party.

Citation: Swati Babber v.

No.CIC/SA/A/2015/001407

Guru

Govind

Singh

Indraprastha

University,

GNCTD

in

Case

Copies of documents held after the completion of retention period

The appellant filed the RTI application seeking attested copies of external examination question papers
of B. Arch. for a certain period, some answer sheets etc. The Respondent informed that according to
rules of the University, the students are supposed to apply for copies of answer sheets, within 15 days
from the date of declaration of the result. As per the University's retention policy, answer sheets are
retained for three months, from the date of declaration of result. But, if the student fails to apply within
the prescribed period of 15 days, the answer sheets cannot be given to the student, though the same are
held by the public authority upto three months. The CIC ruled that the above retention policy of the
University is not a correct practice. If they have retained the answer sheets, even after the prescribed
retention period for any reason, they cannot deny if it is not destroyed as on the date of RTI application

Comments
No public authority can impose additional restrictions over and above those prescribed under Section 8
of the RTI Act to deny any information to the applicant. A Public Authority is expected to make its own
record retention policy and provide information to any RTI applicant as per the same as long as the
records are not weeded out. If the records have been retained even after the prescribed retention
period, copies of the same cannot be denied if it is not destroyed as on the date of RTI application.
Further, a Public Authority is required to hold the records, if an RTI application is pending before the
authorities.

Citation: Rishipal Singh Tomar v. Directorate of Education in Case No. CIC/SA/A/2014/001474

Seeking copy of Caste Certificate of an officer
Appellant sought a copy of Schedule Tribe (ST) certificate of a particular officer under the RTI Act, on
the basis of an assumption that it might be fake. The PIO replied that SC certificate was not enclosed to
the service book of the officer. The Central Information Commission (CIC) asked the appellant whether
the appellant is having any basis to his suspicion about the ST certificate and about his interest in
seeking these details, but the appellant could not convince the CIC. The CIC observed that the appellant
had been heard earlier by it in several appeals. The CIC commented that the appellant is a cantankerous
misuser of RTI and does not deserve any sympathy or information, as there is no public interest. The
appellant is wrecking vengeance against the authority and officers for taking stern action against his
misconduct. The CIC admonished him for misuse of RTI. The CIC ruled that the Public Authority can
reject his RTI applications about inquiry and inquiry officers as that would impede the entire process of
inquiry.
Comments
5

There is no specific provision in the RTI Act regarding rejection of an application for alleged misuse of
the RTI Act. However, the CIC has repeatedly come to the aid of the PIOs in cases of harassment by
repeated filing of applications.

Citation: Shri Mallikarjun v. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. in File No. CIC/SH/A/2014/001472
Disclosure of service book
The Appellant sought certified copies of extracts of the service register of the Senior Regional Manager
of the Respondents in their Bengaluru office. The Respondents replied that the expression 'service
register' was not prevalent in their organization and they do not maintain any service book in respect of
their Senior Regional Manager. The Appellant stated that such records should be available in respect of
the employees of the public authority. The CIC held that the records concerning the service matters of
the Senior Regional Manager must have been maintained by the public authority in one form or the
other. If these are not available as a register or book, these should be available on files or in electronic
form. Further, the CIC observed that the information is exempt from disclosure under Section 8 (1) (j) of
the RTI Act. Referring to the allegation of irregularities made by the appellant, the CIC held that this
allegation cannot become the ground of larger public interest.
Comments
The High Court of Madhya Pradesh in Shrikant Pandya vs. State of M.P. [W.P. No. 13646 of 2009,
judgment dated 1.2.2010] the service book contains annual confidential reports and other information
like details of family and nomination thereo which are personal in nature and a Government servant has
a right to guard the same. If parted with, disclosure would certainly lead to the unwarranted invasion of
privacy of the Government servant. Therefore, a PIO must remember that as the service book contains
6

personal information about an employee, it is not liable to be disclosed as such to an applicant.

Citation: Shri R.K. Jain v.

No.CIC/DS/C/2013/00625/SB

Under

Secretary,

(CXI),

Department

of

Revenue

in

Appeal

Duration of inspection of the documents

The complainant submitted that the PIO had allowed the inspection of the records in question for 15
minutes only and that too with the condition that the entry to the building for the purpose of inspection
shall be at the discretion of the security agencies. The FAA directed the PIO to provide access to the
records to the appellant in such a manner that the purpose of the application is fulfilled. The
complainant alleged that the PIO has been persistently causing obstruction to supply of the information
to the complainant despite the orders of the FAA. The PIO contended that he made effort to get file
located which was more than ten year old and had given prior intimation for inspection of documents.
The complainant admitted that he has been provided the requisite information though there has been a
delay and demanded to be compensated. The CIC held that due to communication gap, there was a delay
in the inspection of the file by the complainant and no further action is required.

Comments
The duration of inspection and convenience of the applicant to inspect the documents was the issue
under consideration in the case. Under RTI Rules, an applicant is entitled to one hour inspection free of
any charge and thereafter, on payment of fees. A PIO should not restrict the timings of an applicant
arbitrarily which may lead to a charge of obstruction to free flow of information.

Citation: Shri Chattra Pal Singh v. State Bank of India in Appeal: No. CIC/MP/A/2014/002273 No.
CIC/MP/A/2014/002274 No. CIC/MP/A/2014/002275
Information about educational loans
The appellant sought copies of circulars applicable to the education loan granted by bank and delivered
to the wards of general public. The Public Information Officer (PIO) informed the appellant that
education loan to the wards of staff was sanctioned on the same terms and conditions as prescribed for
public except a few relaxations. The PIO further informed that the banks internal guidelines/circulars
as required were of commercial confidence the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position
of the bank, hence exempt under the provisions of section 8(1)(d) of the RTI Act. During hearing before
the CIC, the appellants representative stated that the circulars issued by the bank were in the interest
of the customers, disclosure of which may not harm in any way the competitive position of the bank. The
Commission directed the PIO to provide copy of circulars of 2001 and latest circulars of 2012 which are
issued for disseminating information for grant of education loan to the ward of the general public to the
appellant.
Comments
Educational loans are being increasingly used by students from various walks of life and it imperative
that information relating to grant of such loans should be suo motu put in public domain.

Citation: Jaspal Singh v. Deen Dayal Upadhyay Hospital in Case No. CIC/SA/A/2015/000751
Medico legal report of self and others
The appellant suffered injury on his head in a clash which he alleged to have been shown as 'simple' in
8

the MLC and those of his opponents were shown as 'grievous' even though they were simple injuries. He
claimed that as a result, the police filed criminal case against him under section 308 IPC, attempt to
murder. He sought the MLC of himself and that of his neighbours in order to fight his case in the court.
The CIC directed to provide the MLC report.
Comments
The CIC has been conservative in providing the MLC reports holding them as personal information which
may impede the process prosecution of the accused. In most cases, it has been directed by the CIC to
obtain such reports through the court rather than taking up the onus on itself to decide whether such
information should be given.
Citation:
Shri
Maniram
Sharma
v.
Ministry
of
Parliamentary
Affairs
in
Decision
No.CIC/RM/C/2014/900171/SB/
Proactive disclosure by public authority
The appellant filed an online complaint with the CPIO, Rajya Sabha Secretariat seeking information on
compliance by Public Authority through a specific reply on certain points regarding the DoPT's guidelines
dated 15.04.2013 in respect of the implementation of the Section 4 of RTI Act (Proactive disclosure by
public
authority
Link
http://www.rtifoundationofindia.com/dopt/Suo_moto_disclosure15042013.pdf). The appellant sought the action taken report on the compliance of the guidelines of
DoPT along with URL link. The CIC directed the CPIO to provide a copy of the Action Taken Report on the
compliance of the guidelines of DoPT OM dated 15.04.2013 to the Commission as well as to the
complainant.
Comments
Many public authorities are not aware of the DoPT guidelines regarding the pro-active disclosure and as
9

a result, the provisions of section 4 of the RTI Act remains to be implemented till date.

Citation: Shri D. Shekhar v. APWD Nirman Bhawan, A & N Administration in File No.
CIC/SH/C/2014/000545 File No. CIC/SH/C/2014/000438 File No. CIC/SH/C/2014/000549 File No.
CIC/SH/C/2014/000495 File No. CIC/SH/A/2014/001400
Filing of RTI Application to know the fate of earlier application
An application was under the RTI Act seeking information regarding action taken on an earlier RTI
application and first appeal filed by the Complainant. A reply was sent to him on but the Complainant
stated that he did not receive this reply. The Respondents volunteered to send another copy to him.
While noting that no further action is due on this RTI application, the CIC observed that the right course
of action for an RTI applicant, in the event of the PIO not responding to his RTI application, is to file an
appeal to the First Appellate Authority and thereafter, if necessary, an appeal / complaint to the
Commission. Instead, the Complainant took upon himself to enquire into the delay on the part of the
Respondents in responding to his earlier RTI application by filing yet another RTI application. Filing of
such applications is avoidable because the RTI Act provides for appeals / complaint process in the event
of unsatisfactory action by Respondents on an RTI application. Such applications needlessly clog the
system.
Comments
RTI act is a self contained act which provides for the mechanism to deal with cases where replies have
not been received. An applicant should use the modalities provided under the Act which can provide him
the best results.

10

Citation:
Laxmi
Singh
v.
Indian
No.CIC/BS/A/2013/002265/VS/09430

Railway

Project

Management

Unit

in

Decision

Information regarding a VSAT tender

Appellant sought detailed work information, i.e., design, supply, installation, testing and commissioning
of 25 remote quick deployable suitcase type portable VSATs along with Accident site communication
system on ARTs for Disaster Management in respect of a particular Indian Railways Tender. The PIO
informed that portable VSAT equipment along with accident site communication equipment comes in the
category of critical/security equipment used for strategic purposes of Disaster Management in Indian
Railway. Since the equipments are also interlinked with material related to Ministry of Defence, the
information cannot be disclosed to third party u/s 8(1)(a). The CIC directed the respondent to enable
the appellant to inspect the relevant file within 30 days of this order.
Comments
It is surprising to see that the PIO had not invoked section 8(1)(d) relating to commercial confidence
either of the Railways or the supplier.

Citation: Smt. K.V. Padma v. Corporation Bank in File No. CIC/SH/A/2014/000140

Failure of international roaming to work
The appellant had taken international roaming facility from the BSNL but found that the international
service failed to work in 8 different countries. On return, he surrendered his instrument and requested
the BSNL to investigate why the service did not work and when no reply was received for three months
he wrote to them for refunding the entire amount and also claiming token compensation of Rs.1500/11

for the harassment and inconvenience caused to him. The Public Information Officer (PIO) informed that
there are rules for refund of principal amount within 60 days from the date the service is surrendered
but no rules have been prescribed either for payment of interest or for compensation. He informed that a
cheque for Rs.4724/- in favour of the appellant was issued. The CIC opined that such a callous and
whimsical behaviour on the part of the service provider who deals with the public at large cannot be
treated lightly. The CIC directed the PIO to provide copy e-mail exchanged regarding the appellant's
complaint of his SIM not working and warned the PIO to exercise due care for future.
Comments
The RTI Act is being used to address the grievances related to the quality of services offered by the
PSU's. The PIO should be careful in replying in time and providing the information as available on
records.

Citation: Smt. K.V. Padma v. Corporation Bank in File No. CIC/SH/A/2014/000140

Copies of correspondence regarding bank loan
The Appellant and her husband availed a housing loan and a case was filed by them in the Consumer
Court regarding charging of excessive interest on the loan account. The Appellant sought copies of two
letters exchanged between the zonal office and a branch of the bank. Respondents submitted that
housing loan was granted to the Appellant for purchase of land and construction of house thereon, but
construction was not carried out and the account has become NPA. The Respondents further submitted
that copies of the letters sought by the Appellant were not provided as it is their internal
correspondence and held in a fiduciary capacity. The CIC held that the correspondence pertains to the
loan account of the Appellant and is not held by the Respondents in a fiduciary capacity. Disagreeing
with the denial of information under section 8(1)(e) of the RTI Act, the CIC directed the PIO to provide
12

the copies of the two letters sought by the appellant free of cost.
Comments
If there was any part of the correspondence which was of commercial interest to the bank, perhaps a
claim could have been made for exemption from disclosure for that particular part of letter under section
8 (1) (d) of the RTI Act.

Citation: Shri H N Wadhwa v. State Bank of Patiala in Appeal: No. CIC/MP/A/2014/000124

Copies of the TA / DA & LTC bills
The appellant sought information regarding TA / DA & LTC bills claimed by Shri Achal Kumar Gupta,
Managing Director of the State Bank of Patiala which was denied by the Public Information Officer citing
Section 8(1)(d) and (j). The Central Information Commission (CIC) referred to the judgment of the
Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana and ors in Civil Writ Petition No. 4930 of 2011 and ruled that
the copies of TA bills etc. would clearly be in the nature of personal information and not relatable to the
discharge of the duties in official capacity. The CIC directed to provide the date of travel and the amount
reimbursed.
Comments
The quantum of payment made to a public servant is liable be made public. However, in case of a LTC
travel, the place visited and the details of the family members are exempt from disclosure by virtue of
being personal information.

13

Citation: Ms. Bhuvneshwari Kapoor v. Punjab National Bank in Case No. CIC/MP/A/2014/001197
Proof of Dispatch
The Appellant had asked for certain information about a bank account. Before the CIC, he claimed that
the PIO had not responded to the appellant within the time frame prescribed under the RTI Act. The CIC
observed that the PIO had sent a point-wise response to the appellant within the stipulated period and
directed the PIO to provide proof of dispatch to the appellant.

Comments
A PIO should not only provide the information to an applicant, but should also keep a record of the same
lest a charge of not following the time limit is made against him. In case of failure to provide the proof
of timely dispatch of information, penalty might be imposed on the PIO.

14