Dear sir, I have filed one RTI seeking information or copies of documents wrt all complaints filed in CM HELPLINE and their resolution by CM helpline (MP) for a specific period.(Three months of YEAR 2018) Firstly PIO declined my application stating its not in public interest. When i appealed against same specifying that cm helpline is an ambitious project of government to help public hence its completely in public interest and with sought information public may ascertain if government has resolved complaints properly or not , then First appeal officer has rejected appeal on below two grounds. 1. Complaints may also contain personal information of citizens and giving details thereof may reveal personal information of citizens hence cannot be provided. 2. Complaints received through online mode and sent to respective department in online mode and thereafter there response is also obtained through online mode hence documents related to these complaints not available and cannot be provided. My submission is below 1. I have required information of complaints and resolutions thereof of complaints recd by cm helpline office and of any specific person and giving above reason indicates that government is taking shield of privacy of citizens. 2. Though i have required copies of documents related with above sought information however if same are available in electronic or online mode print out of same can be made available instead of giving this excuse. 3.Complaint was rejected by PIO on basis of public interest reason whereas first appeal officer has found another reason to decline application. My queries 1. Is First appeal officers contention is right? 2. if First appeal officer contention is not correct what are the points or facts i can mention in my 2nd appeal. 3. Kindly share relevant case laws which can support my claim in 2 nd appeal and / further court appeal. 4. Any news or article or source of information can help my application to obtain above information.
From CM Helpline you can gather complete information related to State Government Schemes.
2) you should be provided information sought for by complainant without mentioning contents of complaints
3) you cannot be given detailed particulars of complaints filed
1. See in my view the officer is right in rejecting the appeal as under RTI act third party information cannot be given without there consent. Even you seek information of a case.from court.you are not party it won't be given to.you.
2. Though the second contention of officer is not right as.electronic information can be also.given by printing.same and.cost can be levied.but the privacy is right defence here. Cases can include sensitive information of people though you can seek statics that number of complaints resolves action taken but not the complaint itself.
Dear client,
1. You can opt for some high profile helpline number like chief minister can take information related to state government schemes.
2. However even RTI Act, cannot give such informations.
1. Yes it is right, as of now legally.
2. You may prefer an appeal raising your contention hereinabove.
3. You may go ahead with your contention and may be the case that authorities lays down laws with regards to this. As of now no judgment relates to the exact facts of your case.
Regards
As your query reveals that you have made an application under Right to Information Act seeking the information which is data of complaints and resolutions given to it for specific period of three months.
Elementary reason given to reject your RTI application is information demanded is of personal nature and it is not possible to give information as it is in electronic form.
Answer to your all queries - According to section 2 (n) of the RTI Act, 2005, 'third party' means a person other than the citizen making a request for information and includes a 'public authority'. This implies that the term 'third party' includes anyone other than the appellant or the respondent. In matters where an appellant is seeking information not regarding his or her own activities, or is asking for details of shared records that list details of several persons other than him or her, information cannot be provided until the ‘third party’ consents to disclosure and subsequently until the Central Public Information Office (CPIO), after considering the implications of such disclosure allows it. Section 11 (1) the Act provides the procedure to access third party information wherein the appellant needs to request for the third party’s consent after which the CPIO will produce a written request to the 'third party' and within a stipulated time period obtain their response. However, it is not the information bearer (third party) who holds the key to disclosure. The power, by the RTI Act, 2005, is vested in the public information officer who will then, either see a 'larger public interest', or otherwise allow disclosure based on the merits of the case. In several judgments, the committee upholds principles of natural justice to justify instance of public good but these cannot be upheld for all decisions. It is also interesting to see what comes under the purview of ‘public information’. It’s a misconception if you think that you hold the right to revealing your age, birth date, place you belong to, your marks, the rank that you hold, the salary you get, the returns you file or subsequently any of this information regarding your children. As upheld in Madhulika Rastogi vs Regional Passport Office, New Delhi, on 4 February 2009, M. Rajamannar vs PIO, AC Division, Indira Gandhi National Open University on 18 February 2009 and A.V.Subrahmanyam vs BSNL, Hyderabad on 16 February 2009 — the judgments illustrate that information submitted to public authorities at any point in time whether to get admitted to school, to get a license, to pass a public services examination or even file a divorce; all qualify for access to other people because they have been knowingly submitted to the public domain. A lot of sensitive information like passport details, telephone call records and medical records that can map intimate interactions of a person’s daily life can also be obtained if larger public interest is proven.
Please go through section 8(1)J of the RTI Act and citation RK Jain V/S UOI and another decided by Hon'ble SC.
1. Whether the the reply given by first appellate authority is maintainable or not will be known in the second appeal.
2. You can mention the points by which you are aggrieved mentioning the reasons which you rely upon to have rights to seek the desired information.
3. You may look for the citations by browsing the internet or through a local advocate.
4. If you feel aggrieved over the reply by the first appellate authority, you can escalate the matter through second appeal.
