File No. CIC/SB/C/2016/000067-BJ + CIC/SB/C/2016/000087/BJ. Case: Roopadevi M. Vs The CPIO & Dy. Commissioner (ACC). Central Information Commission
| Case Number | File No. CIC/SB/C/2016/000067-BJ + CIC/SB/C/2016/000087/BJ |
| Judges | Bimal Julka, Information Commissioner |
| Issue | Right To Information Act, 2005 - Sections 6(2), 8, 8(1), 8(1)(g), 8(1)(j) |
| Judgement Date | February 08, 2017 |
| Court | Central Information Commission |
|
|
Decision Bimal Julka, Information Commissioner FACTS: 1. The complainant vide her RTI applications sought information regarding one Mr. M.V. Srinivas-Inspector of Customs (SHED Air Cargo Complex), and desired details of his official income, his date of joining duty, details of declared assets as per official records, whether he was staying in rented premises or own premises, complete details of suspensions/reprimands, departmental enquiries etc from date of joining duty till date of RTI application, details of assets and liabilities, net payment every month of EMIs towards discharge of liabilities like loans, savings scheme, mutual funds, investments in share market, number of children and their present educational qualifications, details of children's marriage, and matters related thereto. 2. The CPIO vide its letter dated 04.02.2016 provided a point wise reply to the complainant stating that the information sought was exempt from disclosure under Section 8(1)(g) and Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, 2005. Dissatisfied by the reply of the CPIO, the complainant approached the Commission. HEARING Facts emerging during the hearing: 3. The following were present: Complainant: Ms. Roopadevi M. (M: 9743072044) alongwith Mr. Kriplani (M: 9845024807) through VC; Respondent: Mr. D. Anil, Additional Commissioner of Customs (M: 9900063930) through VC; 4. The complainant reiterated the contents of her RTI application and stated that due to denial of information by the CPIO, they filed a complaint before the Commission. On being queried as to why they did not file first appeal, it was alleged that even the FAA is conniving with other officials and due to lack of trust in the institution of FAA, a complaint was filed before the Commission. Serious charges were levelled against the officer mentioned in the complaint relating to corrupt practices and amassing wealth through illegal means. Allegations were made against misuse of his power and authority. The respondent explained that the information sought by the complainant related to personal information which had no relationship... |
To continue reading
Request your trial