The Supreme Court dismissed the petitioner's appeal seeking disclosure of certain information about a third party respondent under the Right to Information Act. In a 3-sentence summary:
The Court held that details of memos, notices, and penalties issued to an employee, as well as their assets, property, and tax information, qualify as "personal information" exempt from disclosure under the Act. While larger public interests could warrant disclosure, the petitioner failed to establish this. The dismissal upheld the view that disclosure of such employment and financial details would invade privacy and bear no relationship to public activities.
The document outlines Andhra Pradesh's new Government Land Allotment Policy. Key points:
1. The policy aims to establish uniform guidelines for allotting government land to departments and private organizations, as previous policies lacked consistency.
2. It creates norms around the extent of land allotted based on project type and establishes that only non-arable land should be allocated.
3. An Andhra Pradesh Land Management Authority is constituted to process land allocation requests, monitor land use, and protect government lands.
4. The policy rationalizes land valuation and costs recovered from allottees, and delegates powers for land valuation to revenue officers.
The Right to Information Act was passed in 2005 and provides citizens a legal right to access information from public authorities in order to promote transparency and accountability. It defines public authorities as those established by the constitution, parliament, or state legislatures. Citizens can request information in writing from public information officers and pay applicable fees. Requests must be responded to within 30 days, with some exceptions for urgent matters affecting life or liberty. While most public information is disclosed, there are exemptions around national security, privacy, and other sensitive matters. Appeals can be made if information requests are denied.
This document discusses the concept of indefeasibility of title (IoT) under Section 340 of the National Land Code. It contains the following key points:
1. Section 340 establishes that the title or interest of a registered proprietor is indefeasible, subject to certain exceptions. These exceptions include fraud, misrepresentation, forgery, insufficient or void instruments, and unlawfully acquired titles.
2. IoT can take two forms - immediate indefeasibility where registration confers a guaranteed title, or deferred indefeasibility where the title remains potentially open to attack until transferred. Malaysian law follows the doctrine of deferred indefeasibility.
3. Subsequent purchasers who acquire
This document is a petition filed in the Supreme Court of India by Commodore Lokesh K. Batra against an order of the Delhi High Court dated 07.01.2016. The petition raises questions of law regarding the interpretation of provisions of the Right to Information Act and the scope of powers of the Central Information Commission. It argues that the High Court erred in its interpretation that denied information to the petitioner despite it being available with the respondent. It seeks to challenge the High Court order allowing the appeal of the Registrar, Supreme Court of India against a single judge order directing disclosure of certain information to the petitioner.
The document discusses anticipatory bail under Indian law. It provides details on:
- What anticipatory bail is and the section that empowers courts to grant it (Section 438)
- The courts that have jurisdiction to grant anticipatory bail - High Courts and Courts of Session
- The factors courts consider when deciding anticipatory bail applications
- Conditions courts can impose when granting anticipatory bail
- When a person can apply for anticipatory bail and the wide discretion courts have in deciding applications
The document discusses India's transition from a British police state to a democratic welfare state following independence. It outlines key aspects of public service and the right to service in India. The Right to Service Act passed in Kerala in 2012 aims to guarantee timely delivery of public services to citizens. It requires government departments to notify the public of covered services and timeframes, and establishes a three-level appeals process for aggrieved persons who do not receive services on time. The act also includes penalty provisions for failure to provide services in a timely manner.
This document summarizes two Supreme Court cases:
1) The first case involved a PIL challenging the telecast of episodes of a TV serial on grounds of public interest. The Supreme Court held that interim injunction violated the producer's freedom of expression and required prima facie evidence of harm.
2) The second case addressed whether commercial advertisements are protected speech. The Supreme Court held that commercial speech is protected under the Constitution but publishing telephone subscriber lists requires permission. The appellant was allowed to publish paid ads but couldn't replicate telephone directory entries.
Dr. Sanjay Sawant Dessai gave a presentation on the Right to Information Act 2005. He discussed what RTI is, whose right it protects, the types of information covered, how to obtain information, and the process for appeals. He explained that RTI aims to empower citizens and promote government transparency and accountability. He outlined the roles of Public Information Officers and the timelines for responding to and appealing RTI requests. He also described the types of information that must be publicly disclosed and exemptions to disclosure.
The document outlines Andhra Pradesh's new Government Land Allotment Policy. Key points:
1. The policy aims to establish uniform guidelines for allotting government land to departments and private organizations, as previous policies lacked consistency.
2. It creates norms around the extent of land allotted based on project type and establishes that only non-arable land should be allocated.
3. An Andhra Pradesh Land Management Authority is constituted to process land allocation requests, monitor land use, and protect government lands.
4. The policy rationalizes land valuation and costs recovered from allottees, and delegates powers for land valuation to revenue officers.
The Right to Information Act was passed in 2005 and provides citizens a legal right to access information from public authorities in order to promote transparency and accountability. It defines public authorities as those established by the constitution, parliament, or state legislatures. Citizens can request information in writing from public information officers and pay applicable fees. Requests must be responded to within 30 days, with some exceptions for urgent matters affecting life or liberty. While most public information is disclosed, there are exemptions around national security, privacy, and other sensitive matters. Appeals can be made if information requests are denied.
This document discusses the concept of indefeasibility of title (IoT) under Section 340 of the National Land Code. It contains the following key points:
1. Section 340 establishes that the title or interest of a registered proprietor is indefeasible, subject to certain exceptions. These exceptions include fraud, misrepresentation, forgery, insufficient or void instruments, and unlawfully acquired titles.
2. IoT can take two forms - immediate indefeasibility where registration confers a guaranteed title, or deferred indefeasibility where the title remains potentially open to attack until transferred. Malaysian law follows the doctrine of deferred indefeasibility.
3. Subsequent purchasers who acquire
This document is a petition filed in the Supreme Court of India by Commodore Lokesh K. Batra against an order of the Delhi High Court dated 07.01.2016. The petition raises questions of law regarding the interpretation of provisions of the Right to Information Act and the scope of powers of the Central Information Commission. It argues that the High Court erred in its interpretation that denied information to the petitioner despite it being available with the respondent. It seeks to challenge the High Court order allowing the appeal of the Registrar, Supreme Court of India against a single judge order directing disclosure of certain information to the petitioner.
The document discusses anticipatory bail under Indian law. It provides details on:
- What anticipatory bail is and the section that empowers courts to grant it (Section 438)
- The courts that have jurisdiction to grant anticipatory bail - High Courts and Courts of Session
- The factors courts consider when deciding anticipatory bail applications
- Conditions courts can impose when granting anticipatory bail
- When a person can apply for anticipatory bail and the wide discretion courts have in deciding applications
The document discusses India's transition from a British police state to a democratic welfare state following independence. It outlines key aspects of public service and the right to service in India. The Right to Service Act passed in Kerala in 2012 aims to guarantee timely delivery of public services to citizens. It requires government departments to notify the public of covered services and timeframes, and establishes a three-level appeals process for aggrieved persons who do not receive services on time. The act also includes penalty provisions for failure to provide services in a timely manner.
This document summarizes two Supreme Court cases:
1) The first case involved a PIL challenging the telecast of episodes of a TV serial on grounds of public interest. The Supreme Court held that interim injunction violated the producer's freedom of expression and required prima facie evidence of harm.
2) The second case addressed whether commercial advertisements are protected speech. The Supreme Court held that commercial speech is protected under the Constitution but publishing telephone subscriber lists requires permission. The appellant was allowed to publish paid ads but couldn't replicate telephone directory entries.
Dr. Sanjay Sawant Dessai gave a presentation on the Right to Information Act 2005. He discussed what RTI is, whose right it protects, the types of information covered, how to obtain information, and the process for appeals. He explained that RTI aims to empower citizens and promote government transparency and accountability. He outlined the roles of Public Information Officers and the timelines for responding to and appealing RTI requests. He also described the types of information that must be publicly disclosed and exemptions to disclosure.
The document discusses the Right to Information Act in India. It was passed by Parliament in 2005 to provide citizens access to information held by public authorities. Any citizen can request information from a public authority, which must reply within 30 days. It also requires authorities to proactively disclose certain information. The Act covers all of India except Jammu and Kashmir. It establishes a system for citizens to appeal if their information requests are denied. Certain types of information like national security, privacy, and trade secrets are exempt from disclosure.
The document discusses the evolution of the right to education in India from ancient times to its establishment as a fundamental right in the constitution. It traces how education progressed from being an exclusive privilege for higher castes to demands for free and compulsory education by freedom fighters. Key developments included the introduction of the first compulsory education law in 1906 in Baroda, recommendations of the National Policy on Education in 1968, and the Supreme Court's recognition of education as a fundamental right in Mohini Jain vs Union of India in 1992. The document provides addresses of the company's offices in Chennai, Bangalore and Coimbatore and contact details.
The document summarizes the evolution of anti-corruption laws in India. It discusses how the Indian Penal Code of 1862 was supplemented by the Prevention of Corruption Act of 1947 to define criminal misconduct. The PC Act was further expanded in 1988 and recently amended in 2018. The key amendments in 2018 include narrowing the definition of criminal misconduct, introducing time limits for trial completion, and provisions targeting bribery by commercial organizations.
The document discusses the concept of sanction for prosecution under Indian law. It provides definitions for key terms like public servant and discusses the legal provisions around sanction requirements. Some main points:
- Sanction is required before prosecuting a public servant to prevent vexatious/frivolous cases and protect the innocent.
- The Prevention of Corruption Act and Code of Criminal Procedure contain sanction provisions for prosecuting public servants.
- A public servant is broadly defined and can include government employees, elected officials, and others. Ministers and the Chief Minister are considered public servants.
- Sanction is typically granted by the authority that appointed the public servant, but the Governor has power to grant sanction for prosecuting
The document summarizes key aspects of the Right to Information Act 2005 in India, which aims to promote transparency and accountability in governance. It discusses the objectives of the act, what information can be accessed, exceptions, procedures for filing information requests, penalties for non-compliance, and responsibilities of public authorities to proactively disclose information. The act established central and state information commissions to hear appeals related to information requests.
The document discusses the concept of separation of powers in India. It defines separation of powers as a system where the legislative, executive, and judicial powers of government are divided into distinct branches to limit any one branch from exercising the core functions of another. While India does not strictly adhere to separation of powers, the Constitution includes several provisions that demonstrate the existence of the doctrine, such as vesting executive power in the President and vesting lawmaking power in Parliament. The judiciary has also affirmed separation of powers as part of the basic structure of the Indian Constitution.
This document contains instructions and templates for Public Information Officers regarding their duties and responsibilities under the Right to Information Act 2005.
It provides guidance on properly forwarding RTI applications and appeals to the relevant authorities. It also includes templates for rejecting applications if the requests are vague or non-specific, transferring applications to other departments as needed, notifying third parties about disclosed information, and collecting additional fees from applicants.
The document advises PIOs to handle requests courteously and within statutory timeframes, while protecting privacy and following legal exemptions. It also outlines best practices for PIOs and APIOs to assist applicants and maintain updated records to facilitate information disclosure.
This document outlines the qualifications, disqualifications, and conditions for vacating seats for members of parliament (MPs) in India. MPs must be Indian citizens over the age of 25 for the Lok Sabha or 30 for the Rajya Sabha. They can be disqualified for holding an office of profit, unsoundness of mind, being an undischarged insolvent, ceasing to be a citizen of India, or defecting by changing their political party affiliation. The presiding officers of each house, such as the Speaker of the Lok Sabha, decide on disqualification cases. Grounds for vacating a seat include resignation, extended absence, or taking up another office such as the presidency.
Sukre Suraj Ratanrao's document discusses bona fide industrial use of land under section 44A of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code 1966. It defines bona fide use of land and explains that no permission is required to convert agricultural land to non-agricultural use for bona fide industrial purposes, including manufacturing, processing, handicrafts, power projects, and warehouses. The procedure for converting agricultural land to non-agricultural land for bona fide use requires informing the tahsildar within 30 days through the village officer, and failure to do so within 30 days could result in fines or reverting the land to its original form.
Section 482 of the CrPC grants High Courts inherent powers to secure the ends of justice or prevent abuse of legal process. [1] It allows High Courts to quash criminal proceedings that amount to harassment or where there is no prima facie offense. [2] The powers are wide but must be used cautiously and not to interfere with legitimate prosecution. [3] High Courts can exercise these powers at any stage of proceedings under Section 482 to prevent injustice.
The document discusses the Right to Information (RTI) Act in India. It provides:
1) An overview of key aspects of the RTI Act such as the citizens' right to obtain information from public authorities, relevant definitions, and provisions for filing RTI applications.
2) A step-by-step explanation of how to draft and file an RTI application, including addressing it to the Public Information Officer, describing the information sought, and including an inspection clause.
3) Details on the appeal process if the information requested is not provided or is incomplete, including filing first and second appeals.
The document aims to educate citizens about their right to information and how to effectively exercise this right
This document is a Supreme Court of India ruling on whether sanction is required under Section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code to initiate criminal proceedings against public servants for offenses allegedly committed in their official duties. The Court sets aside the High Court order quashing the criminal proceedings for lack of sanction. The Court finds that the alleged acts of cheating, fabrication of records and misappropriation cannot be considered discharge of official duties. It directs the trial court to expedite and complete the criminal trial by December 31, 2015.
The document provides an overview of intellectual property rights (IPR) in Nepal. It discusses how Nepal's IPR regime has historically been limited, with activities mainly focused on trademarks, designs, patents, and copyrights. Statistics show few patent and design applications annually and around 4,000 valid trademarks. Loopholes in laws have encouraged infringements on well-known foreign brands. While government policies aim to strengthen IPR, Nepal still needs to reform laws to be fully compliant with international treaties and develop specialized IPR offices.
Status Of The President Under The ConstitutionShiva Shankara
The document discusses the status and powers of the President of India under the Indian Constitution. It begins with providing context on the historical meaning and origins of the term "President". It then outlines the key provisions in the Constitution related to the President's role, functions, and powers. The President has executive, legislative, and emergency powers but courts have ruled that most powers must be exercised on the advice of the Council of Ministers. There is debate around some independent powers like pardoning and dissolving the lower house of parliament. Overall, the document analyzes the President's role as outlined in the Constitution and issues that have been subject to judicial interpretation.
This document provides an overview of anti-defection laws in India. It defines defection as a member abandoning loyalty to their political party. Large scale defections after the 1967 elections affected legislative functioning and led to the 52nd amendment adding the 10th schedule on anti-defection. This lays out grounds for disqualification of defecting members of political parties or independents. It discusses related court cases and loopholes regarding splits, mergers and the status of expelled members.
The Right to Information Act was implemented in India to provide citizens the right to access information from public authorities in order to promote transparency and accountability. It applies to all states and union territories except Jammu and Kashmir. The Act requires public authorities to disclose information proactively and respond to requests within a 30 day period. It also establishes penalties for non-compliance and appeal processes for information seekers. However, there are exemptions for information that could affect national security, investigation processes, or commercial interests.
The Indian Registration Act of 1908 outlines various sections related to compulsory and optional registration of documents in India. Key points:
1) Section 17 lists documents of which registration is compulsory, including gifts of immovable property, leases over one year, and instruments related to rights over property valued over 100 rupees.
2) Section 18 allows for optional registration of similar documents valued under 100 rupees and leases under one year.
3) Documents must generally be presented for registration within 4 months and must contain an accurate description and map of the property for registration relating to land.
1) The document discusses the enforceability of an allotment letter as a binding contract between a developer and buyer for a property.
2) It notes that an allotment letter contains the essential elements of a valid contract and a buyer can seek specific performance if deprived of what was promised in the allotment letter.
3) The case details a property dispute where the buyer made substantial payments as per the allotment letter and payment plan, but the developer later demanded additional amounts including interest without providing details of amounts or interest calculation.
The document analyzes approaches to constitutional interpretation, specifically originalism versus a living document approach. It summarizes the key tenets of each view, including that originalists believe the constitution should be interpreted based on its original public meaning, while living document theorists argue it can evolve with changing times. The document also notes criticisms of both views, such as originalists making exceptions not supported by the original text, and living document views potentially undermining founding principles of liberty. Overall it argues the originalist approach grounded in the constitution's text and history best protects individual liberties.
This document is a Supreme Court of India order regarding a Right to Information (RTI) request. It summarizes the petitioner's RTI request seeking various personal and employment details of a third party respondent. The Central Information Commission and courts below denied most of the information, citing exemptions under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act for "personal information." The Supreme Court examines the scope and interpretation of Sections 8(1)(e), (g), and (j) exemptions, to determine if the denied information should have been provided.
The document discusses the Right to Information Act in India. It was passed by Parliament in 2005 to provide citizens access to information held by public authorities. Any citizen can request information from a public authority, which must reply within 30 days. It also requires authorities to proactively disclose certain information. The Act covers all of India except Jammu and Kashmir. It establishes a system for citizens to appeal if their information requests are denied. Certain types of information like national security, privacy, and trade secrets are exempt from disclosure.
The document discusses the evolution of the right to education in India from ancient times to its establishment as a fundamental right in the constitution. It traces how education progressed from being an exclusive privilege for higher castes to demands for free and compulsory education by freedom fighters. Key developments included the introduction of the first compulsory education law in 1906 in Baroda, recommendations of the National Policy on Education in 1968, and the Supreme Court's recognition of education as a fundamental right in Mohini Jain vs Union of India in 1992. The document provides addresses of the company's offices in Chennai, Bangalore and Coimbatore and contact details.
The document summarizes the evolution of anti-corruption laws in India. It discusses how the Indian Penal Code of 1862 was supplemented by the Prevention of Corruption Act of 1947 to define criminal misconduct. The PC Act was further expanded in 1988 and recently amended in 2018. The key amendments in 2018 include narrowing the definition of criminal misconduct, introducing time limits for trial completion, and provisions targeting bribery by commercial organizations.
The document discusses the concept of sanction for prosecution under Indian law. It provides definitions for key terms like public servant and discusses the legal provisions around sanction requirements. Some main points:
- Sanction is required before prosecuting a public servant to prevent vexatious/frivolous cases and protect the innocent.
- The Prevention of Corruption Act and Code of Criminal Procedure contain sanction provisions for prosecuting public servants.
- A public servant is broadly defined and can include government employees, elected officials, and others. Ministers and the Chief Minister are considered public servants.
- Sanction is typically granted by the authority that appointed the public servant, but the Governor has power to grant sanction for prosecuting
The document summarizes key aspects of the Right to Information Act 2005 in India, which aims to promote transparency and accountability in governance. It discusses the objectives of the act, what information can be accessed, exceptions, procedures for filing information requests, penalties for non-compliance, and responsibilities of public authorities to proactively disclose information. The act established central and state information commissions to hear appeals related to information requests.
The document discusses the concept of separation of powers in India. It defines separation of powers as a system where the legislative, executive, and judicial powers of government are divided into distinct branches to limit any one branch from exercising the core functions of another. While India does not strictly adhere to separation of powers, the Constitution includes several provisions that demonstrate the existence of the doctrine, such as vesting executive power in the President and vesting lawmaking power in Parliament. The judiciary has also affirmed separation of powers as part of the basic structure of the Indian Constitution.
This document contains instructions and templates for Public Information Officers regarding their duties and responsibilities under the Right to Information Act 2005.
It provides guidance on properly forwarding RTI applications and appeals to the relevant authorities. It also includes templates for rejecting applications if the requests are vague or non-specific, transferring applications to other departments as needed, notifying third parties about disclosed information, and collecting additional fees from applicants.
The document advises PIOs to handle requests courteously and within statutory timeframes, while protecting privacy and following legal exemptions. It also outlines best practices for PIOs and APIOs to assist applicants and maintain updated records to facilitate information disclosure.
This document outlines the qualifications, disqualifications, and conditions for vacating seats for members of parliament (MPs) in India. MPs must be Indian citizens over the age of 25 for the Lok Sabha or 30 for the Rajya Sabha. They can be disqualified for holding an office of profit, unsoundness of mind, being an undischarged insolvent, ceasing to be a citizen of India, or defecting by changing their political party affiliation. The presiding officers of each house, such as the Speaker of the Lok Sabha, decide on disqualification cases. Grounds for vacating a seat include resignation, extended absence, or taking up another office such as the presidency.
Sukre Suraj Ratanrao's document discusses bona fide industrial use of land under section 44A of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code 1966. It defines bona fide use of land and explains that no permission is required to convert agricultural land to non-agricultural use for bona fide industrial purposes, including manufacturing, processing, handicrafts, power projects, and warehouses. The procedure for converting agricultural land to non-agricultural land for bona fide use requires informing the tahsildar within 30 days through the village officer, and failure to do so within 30 days could result in fines or reverting the land to its original form.
Section 482 of the CrPC grants High Courts inherent powers to secure the ends of justice or prevent abuse of legal process. [1] It allows High Courts to quash criminal proceedings that amount to harassment or where there is no prima facie offense. [2] The powers are wide but must be used cautiously and not to interfere with legitimate prosecution. [3] High Courts can exercise these powers at any stage of proceedings under Section 482 to prevent injustice.
The document discusses the Right to Information (RTI) Act in India. It provides:
1) An overview of key aspects of the RTI Act such as the citizens' right to obtain information from public authorities, relevant definitions, and provisions for filing RTI applications.
2) A step-by-step explanation of how to draft and file an RTI application, including addressing it to the Public Information Officer, describing the information sought, and including an inspection clause.
3) Details on the appeal process if the information requested is not provided or is incomplete, including filing first and second appeals.
The document aims to educate citizens about their right to information and how to effectively exercise this right
This document is a Supreme Court of India ruling on whether sanction is required under Section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code to initiate criminal proceedings against public servants for offenses allegedly committed in their official duties. The Court sets aside the High Court order quashing the criminal proceedings for lack of sanction. The Court finds that the alleged acts of cheating, fabrication of records and misappropriation cannot be considered discharge of official duties. It directs the trial court to expedite and complete the criminal trial by December 31, 2015.
The document provides an overview of intellectual property rights (IPR) in Nepal. It discusses how Nepal's IPR regime has historically been limited, with activities mainly focused on trademarks, designs, patents, and copyrights. Statistics show few patent and design applications annually and around 4,000 valid trademarks. Loopholes in laws have encouraged infringements on well-known foreign brands. While government policies aim to strengthen IPR, Nepal still needs to reform laws to be fully compliant with international treaties and develop specialized IPR offices.
Status Of The President Under The ConstitutionShiva Shankara
The document discusses the status and powers of the President of India under the Indian Constitution. It begins with providing context on the historical meaning and origins of the term "President". It then outlines the key provisions in the Constitution related to the President's role, functions, and powers. The President has executive, legislative, and emergency powers but courts have ruled that most powers must be exercised on the advice of the Council of Ministers. There is debate around some independent powers like pardoning and dissolving the lower house of parliament. Overall, the document analyzes the President's role as outlined in the Constitution and issues that have been subject to judicial interpretation.
This document provides an overview of anti-defection laws in India. It defines defection as a member abandoning loyalty to their political party. Large scale defections after the 1967 elections affected legislative functioning and led to the 52nd amendment adding the 10th schedule on anti-defection. This lays out grounds for disqualification of defecting members of political parties or independents. It discusses related court cases and loopholes regarding splits, mergers and the status of expelled members.
The Right to Information Act was implemented in India to provide citizens the right to access information from public authorities in order to promote transparency and accountability. It applies to all states and union territories except Jammu and Kashmir. The Act requires public authorities to disclose information proactively and respond to requests within a 30 day period. It also establishes penalties for non-compliance and appeal processes for information seekers. However, there are exemptions for information that could affect national security, investigation processes, or commercial interests.
The Indian Registration Act of 1908 outlines various sections related to compulsory and optional registration of documents in India. Key points:
1) Section 17 lists documents of which registration is compulsory, including gifts of immovable property, leases over one year, and instruments related to rights over property valued over 100 rupees.
2) Section 18 allows for optional registration of similar documents valued under 100 rupees and leases under one year.
3) Documents must generally be presented for registration within 4 months and must contain an accurate description and map of the property for registration relating to land.
1) The document discusses the enforceability of an allotment letter as a binding contract between a developer and buyer for a property.
2) It notes that an allotment letter contains the essential elements of a valid contract and a buyer can seek specific performance if deprived of what was promised in the allotment letter.
3) The case details a property dispute where the buyer made substantial payments as per the allotment letter and payment plan, but the developer later demanded additional amounts including interest without providing details of amounts or interest calculation.
The document analyzes approaches to constitutional interpretation, specifically originalism versus a living document approach. It summarizes the key tenets of each view, including that originalists believe the constitution should be interpreted based on its original public meaning, while living document theorists argue it can evolve with changing times. The document also notes criticisms of both views, such as originalists making exceptions not supported by the original text, and living document views potentially undermining founding principles of liberty. Overall it argues the originalist approach grounded in the constitution's text and history best protects individual liberties.
This document is a Supreme Court of India order regarding a Right to Information (RTI) request. It summarizes the petitioner's RTI request seeking various personal and employment details of a third party respondent. The Central Information Commission and courts below denied most of the information, citing exemptions under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act for "personal information." The Supreme Court examines the scope and interpretation of Sections 8(1)(e), (g), and (j) exemptions, to determine if the denied information should have been provided.
Second Appeal against Registrar CIC dated 24.03.2017Om Prakash Poddar
This document is a filing index for a second appeal made to the Central Information Commission in India regarding a request for information under the Right to Information Act 2005. The index lists 7 items, including the second appeal application dated February 16, 2017, responses from the First Appellate Authority and Central Public Information Officer, the original RTI request, and communications with the CIC and Prime Minister's Office from November 30, 2016 to January 4, 2017. The appellant argues that the CPIO and FAA did not satisfactorily provide the requested information regarding provisions for life and liberty under the RTI Act and contradictory replies from the CIC. The appellant requests true information be provided in accordance with the RTI Act and Rules.
The document is a court order from the High Court of Delhi regarding a writ petition filed by Amit Kumar Shrivastava against the Central Information Commission. Some key points:
1) The petitioner filed an RTI application seeking information about a case registered against him by CBI and related departmental proceedings.
2) The CIC rejected the appeal citing an exemption under Section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act, which allows withholding information that could impede an investigation.
3) The court dismisses the writ petition, noting the petitioner failed to disclose serious allegations and criminal proceedings against him in the petition. The court also finds the CIC order was correctly decided and Section 8(
The document discusses the Right to Information Act in India. It provides background on how secrecy was the norm in British India but transparency became a pressing need for Indian citizens after independence. It summarizes the key objectives of the RTI Act to establish an informed citizenry and open society with transparent governance. It also discusses the role of judicial precedents in establishing information as a right under freedom of speech. The document analyzes a key court case that established the Chief Justice of India and Supreme Court of India as a single public authority under the RTI Act, with information held by the CJI subject to disclosure.
The document discusses a case where an individual filed a Right to Information request seeking details of medical expenses for judges of the Supreme Court of India. The Central Information Commission had directed that these medical expense records be maintained separately for each judge. However, the court set aside this order, finding that medical records are exempt from disclosure and there was no valid public interest in disclosing individual judges' medical reimbursement details.
Information in income-tax returns cannot be accessed through R.T.I. Act excep...D Murali ☆
Information in income-tax returns cannot be accessed through R.T.I. Act except on ground of larger public interest - T. N. Pandey - Article published in Business Advisor, dated October 25, 2016 - http://www.magzter.com/IN/Shrinikethan/Business-Advisor/Business/
The Delhi High Court heard an appeal from the Registrar of the Supreme Court of India regarding an order from the Central Information Commission (CIC). The CIC had directed the Registrar to provide information on cases pending before the Supreme Court where judgments were reserved during 2007-2009. The High Court overturned the CIC's order and the order of the single judge upholding it. The Court found that under the Right to Information Act, a public authority is only required to provide information that is already available with it, and cannot be compelled to collate information in a particular form if it is not maintained that way. As the Supreme Court did not maintain the requested data in the form sought, the direction to provide that information was
This document is a court order from the High Court of Madras regarding a writ petition filed by the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission challenging an order from the Tamil Nadu Information Commission. The TNPSC did not want to provide certain caste-wise information on selected candidates that was requested under the Right to Information Act. The High Court dismissed the writ petition and upheld the order of the Information Commission. The court found that disclosing caste-wise details of selected candidates would benefit people in verifying reservation quotas and that the RTI Act aims to ensure transparency in government workings.
The Right to Information Act, 2005 has been subverted most blatantly and with impunity by the information commissioners appointed to enforce the very same law. Here is an e mail I had sent to Sharat Sabarwal, one such information commissioner at the Central Information Commission. This feedback on one of his orders amply illustrates how the law is being subverted by some of the worst traitors in the world!
The Right to Information Act, 2005 has been subverted most blatantly and with impunity by the information commissioners appointed to enforce the very same law. Here is a complaint I had sent to the President of India against Basant Seth, one such information commissioner at the Central Information Commission. This is of necessity somewhat long and would need your indulgence for quite some time!
The document discusses the Right to Information Act 2005 and the Official Secrets Act 1923 in India. It provides background on the need for the RTI Act, including promoting transparency and accountability. It outlines important sections of the RTI Act regarding access to information, designation of information officers, appeals process and penalties. It also discusses the Central Information Commission and landmark cases related to RTI. The document then provides history and aspects covered under the Official Secrets Act 1923, including espionage and secret information. It notes tensions between the RTI Act and OSA, as well as committees recommending changes to the latter. Finally, it outlines some cases where the OSA was invoked against journalists.
The petition challenges certain provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, as amended, on the grounds that they violate fundamental rights under the Constitution. Specifically, the petition challenges the 2019 amendment which arbitrarily classifies "terrorists" without basis in law. It also challenges the near-impossibility of obtaining bail under Section 43D(5) as inserted in 2008, which denies bail if a prima facie case is established. The petition argues these provisions allow arbitrary exercise of power, prevent individuals from challenging bad faith prosecutions, and violate rights to life and liberty. The petition seeks to strike down or read down these provisions.
The High Court order summarizes a writ petition filed by B.S. Yeddyurappa seeking to quash a private complaint, order of reference for investigation, and an FIR registered against him for offenses under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
The court rejects the petitioner's arguments and refuses to quash the proceedings. It finds that the complaint makes separate allegations against the petitioner for his independent act of denotifying land as Deputy Chief Minister. While an earlier order had quashed proceedings against another accused, that order does not benefit the petitioner. The court also notes that the petitioner was no longer in office at the time of the reference order, so sanction was not required. It concludes that the allegations prima fac
The High Court order summarizes a writ petition filed by B.S. Yeddyurappa seeking to quash a private complaint, order of reference for investigation, and an FIR registered against him for offenses under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
The court rejects the petitioner's arguments and refuses to quash the proceedings. It finds that the complaint makes separate allegations against the petitioner for his independent act of denotifying land as Deputy Chief Minister. While an earlier order had quashed proceedings against another accused, that order does not benefit the petitioner. The court also notes the petitioner was no longer in office when the reference was made so sanction was not required. It concludes the allegations prima facie disclose cognizable offenses
Second Appeal against Department of Legal Affairs dated 3_11_ 2016Om Prakash Poddar
This document is a second appeal filed with the Central Information Commission in India regarding information sought through Right to Information requests but not received. It summarizes previous requests and appeals filed with the Department of Legal Affairs in the Government of India and the Law Department of the Government of Bihar regarding frivolous legal cases filed against the appellant in 2010 and 2011. The appellant is seeking replies to 9 questions regarding the cases from the respondent departments.
Second appeal under RTI Act 2005 against Department of legal affairs dated 3....Om Prakash Poddar
Second Appeal under RTI Act 2005 filed before Central Information Commission (CIC), New Delhi upon refusal to supply information by First Appellate Authority Department of Legal Affairs, Ministry of Law & Justice, Government of India & Law Department, Government of Bihar vide diary no. 183721 dated 03.11.2016
got this in my folder, if you have objection of me posting it here, please inform and i will remove it immediately,
great presentation on rti act 2005,
First Appeal against misleading RTI reply by Mr. Krishan Talwar, Deputy Secretary and CPIO, CIC New Delhi pertaining to Life and liberty of an underground Appellant in the garb of section 2 (f) of the RTI Act 2005
CPIO says, "advise, response to queries/questions, opinion, reason are not covered under section 2(f) of RTI Act, 2005".
However, RTI request is very much covered under section 2(f) of RTI Act 2005. As per the definition of section 2(f) of RTI Act 2005,
Section 2(f) of RTI Act 2005 reads as "information" means any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic form and information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force”.
Similar to Slp 27734 -12(supreme court judgment) (20)
Political parties come under rti act- Central Information CommissionLalith Babu
This document discusses two Right to Information (RTI) complaints filed against several major political parties in India regarding disclosure of their accounts and funding. The complaints were filed by Shri Subhash Chandra Aggarwal and Shri Anil Bairwal. The Central Information Commission held hearings with both complainants and representatives from the political parties. Key information presented includes land allotted to political parties at concessional rates in Delhi, rental accommodations provided, and tax exemptions claimed. The complainants argued that political parties should be declared public authorities under the RTI Act due to various benefits received from the government. The Commission was tasked with determining if political parties fall under the definition of a public authority in resolving these matters.
The document summarizes the key aspects of the Right to Services Act, 2012 in India. The act aims to provide time-bound delivery of services to citizens and establish a framework for transparency, accountability and grievance redressal. It mandates designation of officers to deliver notified services within a stipulated time period. It also establishes a multi-level process for applicants to appeal and seek compensation in case of non-compliance.
The document discusses the Right to Information Act (RTI Act) of India and provides some examples of how it has been used. It notes that the RTI Act was enacted in 2005 to promote transparency and accountability in government functions and empower citizens to access information. It also mentions some criticisms of the act, including that information requests are not always addressed in a timely manner and there can be issues with frivolous or vexatious requests. Overall, the RTI Act aims to empower citizens versus government and promote transparency, but its implementation faces challenges.
Programming Foundation Models with DSPy - Meetup SlidesZilliz
Prompting language models is hard, while programming language models is easy. In this talk, I will discuss the state-of-the-art framework DSPy for programming foundation models with its powerful optimizers and runtime constraint system.
Removing Uninteresting Bytes in Software FuzzingAftab Hussain
Imagine a world where software fuzzing, the process of mutating bytes in test seeds to uncover hidden and erroneous program behaviors, becomes faster and more effective. A lot depends on the initial seeds, which can significantly dictate the trajectory of a fuzzing campaign, particularly in terms of how long it takes to uncover interesting behaviour in your code. We introduce DIAR, a technique designed to speedup fuzzing campaigns by pinpointing and eliminating those uninteresting bytes in the seeds. Picture this: instead of wasting valuable resources on meaningless mutations in large, bloated seeds, DIAR removes the unnecessary bytes, streamlining the entire process.
In this work, we equipped AFL, a popular fuzzer, with DIAR and examined two critical Linux libraries -- Libxml's xmllint, a tool for parsing xml documents, and Binutil's readelf, an essential debugging and security analysis command-line tool used to display detailed information about ELF (Executable and Linkable Format). Our preliminary results show that AFL+DIAR does not only discover new paths more quickly but also achieves higher coverage overall. This work thus showcases how starting with lean and optimized seeds can lead to faster, more comprehensive fuzzing campaigns -- and DIAR helps you find such seeds.
- These are slides of the talk given at IEEE International Conference on Software Testing Verification and Validation Workshop, ICSTW 2022.
Essentials of Automations: The Art of Triggers and Actions in FMESafe Software
In this second installment of our Essentials of Automations webinar series, we’ll explore the landscape of triggers and actions, guiding you through the nuances of authoring and adapting workspaces for seamless automations. Gain an understanding of the full spectrum of triggers and actions available in FME, empowering you to enhance your workspaces for efficient automation.
We’ll kick things off by showcasing the most commonly used event-based triggers, introducing you to various automation workflows like manual triggers, schedules, directory watchers, and more. Plus, see how these elements play out in real scenarios.
Whether you’re tweaking your current setup or building from the ground up, this session will arm you with the tools and insights needed to transform your FME usage into a powerhouse of productivity. Join us to discover effective strategies that simplify complex processes, enhancing your productivity and transforming your data management practices with FME. Let’s turn complexity into clarity and make your workspaces work wonders!
GraphSummit Singapore | The Art of the Possible with Graph - Q2 2024Neo4j
Neha Bajwa, Vice President of Product Marketing, Neo4j
Join us as we explore breakthrough innovations enabled by interconnected data and AI. Discover firsthand how organizations use relationships in data to uncover contextual insights and solve our most pressing challenges – from optimizing supply chains, detecting fraud, and improving customer experiences to accelerating drug discoveries.
Dr. Sean Tan, Head of Data Science, Changi Airport Group
Discover how Changi Airport Group (CAG) leverages graph technologies and generative AI to revolutionize their search capabilities. This session delves into the unique search needs of CAG’s diverse passengers and customers, showcasing how graph data structures enhance the accuracy and relevance of AI-generated search results, mitigating the risk of “hallucinations” and improving the overall customer journey.
AI 101: An Introduction to the Basics and Impact of Artificial IntelligenceIndexBug
Imagine a world where machines not only perform tasks but also learn, adapt, and make decisions. This is the promise of Artificial Intelligence (AI), a technology that's not just enhancing our lives but revolutionizing entire industries.
Full-RAG: A modern architecture for hyper-personalizationZilliz
Mike Del Balso, CEO & Co-Founder at Tecton, presents "Full RAG," a novel approach to AI recommendation systems, aiming to push beyond the limitations of traditional models through a deep integration of contextual insights and real-time data, leveraging the Retrieval-Augmented Generation architecture. This talk will outline Full RAG's potential to significantly enhance personalization, address engineering challenges such as data management and model training, and introduce data enrichment with reranking as a key solution. Attendees will gain crucial insights into the importance of hyperpersonalization in AI, the capabilities of Full RAG for advanced personalization, and strategies for managing complex data integrations for deploying cutting-edge AI solutions.
UiPath Test Automation using UiPath Test Suite series, part 5DianaGray10
Welcome to UiPath Test Automation using UiPath Test Suite series part 5. In this session, we will cover CI/CD with devops.
Topics covered:
CI/CD with in UiPath
End-to-end overview of CI/CD pipeline with Azure devops
Speaker:
Lyndsey Byblow, Test Suite Sales Engineer @ UiPath, Inc.
Maruthi Prithivirajan, Head of ASEAN & IN Solution Architecture, Neo4j
Get an inside look at the latest Neo4j innovations that enable relationship-driven intelligence at scale. Learn more about the newest cloud integrations and product enhancements that make Neo4j an essential choice for developers building apps with interconnected data and generative AI.
Observability Concepts EVERY Developer Should Know -- DeveloperWeek Europe.pdfPaige Cruz
Monitoring and observability aren’t traditionally found in software curriculums and many of us cobble this knowledge together from whatever vendor or ecosystem we were first introduced to and whatever is a part of your current company’s observability stack.
While the dev and ops silo continues to crumble….many organizations still relegate monitoring & observability as the purview of ops, infra and SRE teams. This is a mistake - achieving a highly observable system requires collaboration up and down the stack.
I, a former op, would like to extend an invitation to all application developers to join the observability party will share these foundational concepts to build on:
Pushing the limits of ePRTC: 100ns holdover for 100 daysAdtran
At WSTS 2024, Alon Stern explored the topic of parametric holdover and explained how recent research findings can be implemented in real-world PNT networks to achieve 100 nanoseconds of accuracy for up to 100 days.
Goodbye Windows 11: Make Way for Nitrux Linux 3.5.0!SOFTTECHHUB
As the digital landscape continually evolves, operating systems play a critical role in shaping user experiences and productivity. The launch of Nitrux Linux 3.5.0 marks a significant milestone, offering a robust alternative to traditional systems such as Windows 11. This article delves into the essence of Nitrux Linux 3.5.0, exploring its unique features, advantages, and how it stands as a compelling choice for both casual users and tech enthusiasts.
Unlock the Future of Search with MongoDB Atlas_ Vector Search Unleashed.pdfMalak Abu Hammad
Discover how MongoDB Atlas and vector search technology can revolutionize your application's search capabilities. This comprehensive presentation covers:
* What is Vector Search?
* Importance and benefits of vector search
* Practical use cases across various industries
* Step-by-step implementation guide
* Live demos with code snippets
* Enhancing LLM capabilities with vector search
* Best practices and optimization strategies
Perfect for developers, AI enthusiasts, and tech leaders. Learn how to leverage MongoDB Atlas to deliver highly relevant, context-aware search results, transforming your data retrieval process. Stay ahead in tech innovation and maximize the potential of your applications.
#MongoDB #VectorSearch #AI #SemanticSearch #TechInnovation #DataScience #LLM #MachineLearning #SearchTechnology
Let's Integrate MuleSoft RPA, COMPOSER, APM with AWS IDP along with Slackshyamraj55
Discover the seamless integration of RPA (Robotic Process Automation), COMPOSER, and APM with AWS IDP enhanced with Slack notifications. Explore how these technologies converge to streamline workflows, optimize performance, and ensure secure access, all while leveraging the power of AWS IDP and real-time communication via Slack notifications.
Let's Integrate MuleSoft RPA, COMPOSER, APM with AWS IDP along with Slack
Slp 27734 -12(supreme court judgment)
1. REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 27734 of 2012
(@ CC 14781/2012)
Girish Ramchandra Deshpande .. Petitioner
Versus
Cen. Information Commr. & Ors. .. Respondents
O R D E R
1. Delay condoned.
2. We are, in this case, concerned with the question whether the Central
Information Commissioner (for short 'the CIC') acting under the Right to
Information Act, 2005 (for short 'the RTI Act') was right in denying
information regarding the third respondent's personal matters pertaining to
his service career and also denying the details of his assets and
liabilities, movable and immovable properties on the ground that the
information sought for was qualified to be personal information as defined
in clause (j) of Section 8(1) of the RTI Act.
3. The petitioner herein had submitted an application on 27.8.2008
before the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner (Ministry of Labour,
Government of India) calling for various details relating to third
respondent, who was employed as an Enforcement Officer in Sub-Regional
Office, Akola, now working in the State of Madhya Pradesh. As many as 15
queries were made to which the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Nagpur
gave the following reply on 15.9.2008:
"As to Point No.1: Copy of appointment order of Shri A.B. Lute, is
in 3 pages. You have sought the details of
salary in respect of Shri A.B. Lute, which
relates to personal information the disclosures
of which has no relationship to any public
activity or interest, it would cause
unwarranted invasion of the privacy of
individual hence denied as per the RTI
provision under Section 8(1)(j) of the Act.
As to Point No.2: Copy of order of granting Enforcement Officer
Promotion to Shri A.B. Lute, is in 3 Number.
Details of salary to the post along with
statutory and other deductions of Mr. Lute is
denied to provide as per RTI provisions under
Section 8(1)(j) for the reasons mentioned
above.
2. As to Point NO.3: All the transfer orders of Shri A.B. Lute, are
in 13 Numbers. Salary details is rejected as
per the provision under Section 8(1)(j) for the
reason mentioned above.
As to Point No.4: The copies of memo, show cause notice, censure
issued to Mr. Lute, are not being provided on
the ground that it would cause unwarranted
invasion of the privacy of the individual and
has no relationship to any public activity or
interest. Please see RTI provision under
Section 8(1)(j).
As to Point No.5: Copy of EPF (Staff & Conditions) Rules 1962 is
in 60 pages.
As to Point No.6: Copy of return of assets and liabilities in
respect of Mr. Lute cannot be provided as per
the provision of RTI Act under Section 8(1)(j)
as per the reason explained above at point
No.1.
As to Point No.7: Details of investment and other related details
are rejected as per the provision of RTI Act
under Section 8(1)(j) as per the reason
explained above at point No.1.
As to Point No.8: Copy of report of item wise and value wise
details of gifts accepted by Mr. Lute, is
rejected as per the provisions of RTI Act under
Section 8(1)(j) as per the reason explained
above at point No.1.
As to Point No.9: Copy of details of movable, immovable
properties of Mr. Lute, the request to provide
the same is rejected as per the RTI Provisions
under Section 8(1)(j).
As to Point No.10: Mr. Lute is not claiming for TA/DA for
attending the criminal case pending at JMFC,
Akola.
As to Point No.11: Copy of Notification is in 2 numbers.
As to Point No.12: Copy of certified true copy of charge sheet
issued to Mr. Lute - The matter pertains with
3. head Office, Mumbai. Your application is being
forwarded to Head Office, Mumbai as per Section
6(3) of the RTI Act, 2005.
As to Point No.13: Certified True copy of complete enquiry
proceedings initiated against Mr. Lute - It
would cause unwarranted invasion of privacy of
individuals and has no relationship to any
public activity or interest. Please see RTI
provisions under Section 8(1)(j).
As to Point No.14: It would cause unwarranted invasion of privacy
of individuals and has no relationship to any
public activity or interest, hence denied to
provide.
As to Point No.15: Certified true copy of second show cause notice
- It would cause unwarranted invasion of
privacy of individuals and has no relationship
to any public activity or interest, hence
denied to provide."
4. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner approached the CIC. The
CIC passed the order on 18.6.2009, the operative portion of the order reads
as under:
"The question for consideration is whether the aforesaid information
sought by the Appellant can be treated as 'personal information' as
defined in clause (j) of Section 8(1) of the RTI Act. It may be
pertinent to mention that this issue came up before the Full Bench of
the Commission in Appeal No.CIC/AT/A/2008/000628 (Milap Choraria v.
Central Board of Direct Taxes) and the Commission vide its decision
dated 15.6.2009 held that "the Income Tax return have been rightly
held to be personal information exempted from disclosure under clause
(j) of Section 8(1) of the RTI Act by the CPIO and the Appellate
Authority, and the appellant herein has not been able to establish
that a larger public interest would be served by disclosure of this
information. This logic would hold good as far as the ITRs of Shri
Lute are concerned. I would like to further observe that the
information which has been denied to the appellant essentially falls
in two parts - (i) relating to the personal matters pertaining to his
services career; and (ii) Shri Lute's assets & liabilities, movable
and immovable properties and other financial aspects. I have no
hesitation in holding that this information also qualifies to be the
'personal information' as defined in clause (j) of Section 8(1) of the
RTI Act and the appellant has not been able to convince the Commission
that disclosure thereof is in larger public interest."
4. 5. The CIC, after holding so directed the second respondent to disclose
the information at paragraphs 1, 2, 3 (only posting details), 5, 10, 11,
12,13 (only copies of the posting orders) to the appellant within a period
of four weeks from the date of the order. Further, it was held that the
information sought for with regard to the other queries did not qualify for
disclosure.
6. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner filed a writ petition
No.4221 of 2009 which came up for hearing before a learned Single Judge and
the court dismissed the same vide order dated 16.2.2010. The matter was
taken up by way of Letters Patent Appeal No.358 of 2011 before the Division
Bench and the same was dismissed vide order dated 21.12.2011. Against the
said order this special leave petition has been filed.
7. Shri A.P. Wachasunder, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
submitted that the documents sought for vide Sl. Nos.1, 2 and 3 were
pertaining to appointment and promotion and Sl. No.4 and 12 to 15 were
related to disciplinary action and documents at Sl. Nos.6 to 9 pertained to
assets and liabilities and gifts received by the third respondent and the
disclosure of those details, according to the learned counsel, would not
cause unwarranted invasion of privacy.
8. Learned counsel also submitted that the privacy appended to Section
8(1)(j) of the RTI Act widens the scope of documents warranting disclosure
and if those provisions are properly interpreted, it could not be said that
documents pertaining to employment of a person holding the post of
enforcement officer could be treated as documents having no relationship to
any public activity or interest.
9. Learned counsel also pointed out that in view of Section 6(2) of the
RTI Act, the applicant making request for information is not obliged to
give any reason for the requisition and the CIC was not justified in
dismissing his appeal.
10. This Court in Central Board of Secondary Education and another v.
Aditya Bandopadhyay and others (2011) 8 SCC 497 while dealing with the
right of examinees to inspect evaluated answer books in connection with the
examination conducted by the CBSE Board had an occasion to consider in
detail the aims and object of the RTI Act as well as the reasons for the
introduction of the exemption clause in the RTI Act, hence, it is
unnecessary, for the purpose of this case to further examine the meaning
and contents of Section 8 as a whole.
11. We are, however, in this case primarily concerned with the scope and
interpretation to clauses (e), (g) and (j) of Section 8(1) of the RTI Act
which are extracted herein below:
"8. Exemption from disclosure of information.- (1) Notwithstanding
anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give
any citizen,-
(e) information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship,
unless the competent authority is satisfied that the larger public
interest warrants the disclosure of such information;
(g) information, the disclosure of which would endanger the life or
5. physical safety of any person or identify the source of information or
assistance given in confidence for law enforcement or security
purposes;
(j) information which relates to personal information the disclosure
of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or
which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the
individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State
Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may
be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the
disclosure of such information."
12. The petitioner herein sought for copies of all memos, show cause
notices and censure/punishment awarded to the third respondent from his
employer and also details viz. movable and immovable properties and also
the details of his investments, lending and borrowing from Banks and other
financial institutions. Further, he has also sought for the details of
gifts stated to have accepted by the third respondent, his family members
and friends and relatives at the marriage of his son. The information
mostly sought for finds a place in the income tax returns of the third
respondent. The question that has come up for consideration is whether the
above-mentioned information sought for qualifies to be "personal
information" as defined in clause (j) of Section 8(1) of the RTI Act.
13. We are in agreement with the CIC and the courts below that the
details called for by the petitioner i.e. copies of all memos issued to the
third respondent, show cause notices and orders of censure/punishment etc.
are qualified to be personal information as defined in clause (j) of
Section 8(1) of the RTI Act. The performance of an employee/officer in an
organization is primarily a matter between the employee and the employer
and normally those aspects are governed by the service rules which fall
under the expression "personal information", the disclosure of which has no
relationship to any public activity or public interest. On the other hand,
the disclosure of which would cause unwarranted invasion of privacy of that
individual. Of course, in a given case, if the Central Public Information
Officer or the State Public Information Officer of the Appellate Authority
is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of
such information, appropriate orders could be passed but the petitioner
cannot claim those details as a matter of right.
14. 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.
15. The petitioner in the instant case has not made a bona fide public
interest in seeking information, the disclosure of such information would
cause unwarranted invasion of privacy of the individual under Section
8(1)(j) of the RTI Act.
16. We are, therefore, of the view that the petitioner has not succeeded
6. in establishing that the information sought for is for the larger public
interest. That being the fact, we are not inclined to entertain this
special leave petition. Hence, the same is dismissed.
.............................................J.
(K. S. RADHAKRISHNAN)
.............................................J.
(DIPAK MISRA)
New Delhi
October 3, 2012
ITEM NO.1A COURT NO.11 SECTION IX
[FOR ORDERS]
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).27734/2012
(arising out of SLP(C)..CC No.14781/2012)
(From the judgement and order dated 21/12/2011 in LPA No.358/2011 of The
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT NAGPUR)
GIRISH RAMCHANDRA DESHPANDE Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
CEN.INFORMATION COMMR.& ORS. Respondent(s)
Date: 03/10/2012 This Petition was called on for hearing today.
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Jatin Zaveri,Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Surya Kant, Adv.
Ms. Purnima Jauhari, Adv.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice K.S. Radhakrishnan pronounced
reportable order of the Bench comprising His Lordship and Hon'ble Mr.
Justice Dipak Misra.
In terms of signed reportable order, the special leave
petition is dismissed.
7. |(A.D. Sharma) | |(Renuka Sadana)
|
|Court Master | |Court Master
|
(Signed reportble Order is placed on the file)