Central Information CommissionS Gosh vs Directorate General Of Commercial ... on 20 October, 2022Author:Saroj PunhaniBench:Saroj Punhaniके   ीय सूचना आयोग\n                        Central Information Commission\n                            बाबागंगनाथमाग , मुिनरका\n                         Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka\n                          नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067\n\nFile No : CIC/DGCIS/A/2022/615950\n\nS Gosh                                                  ......अपीलकता /Appellant\n\n                                      VERSUS\n                                       बनाम\nCPIO,\nDirectorate General of\nCommercial Intelligence &\nStatistics, RTI Cell, 565,\nAnandapur, Plot No. 22,\nSector-1, Kolkata-700107, West Bengal.             .... ितवादीगण /Respondent\n\nDate of Hearing                   :   18/10/2022\nDate of Decision                  :   18/10/2022\n\nINFORMATION COMMISSIONER :            Saroj Punhani\n\nRelevant facts emerging from appeal:\n\nRTI application filed on          :   02/01/2022\nCPIO replied on                   :   31/01/2022\nFirst appeal filed on             :   31/01/2022\nFirst Appellate Authority order   :   15/02/2022\n2nd Appeal/Complaint dated        :   NIL\n\nInformation sought:The Appellant filed an online RTI application dated 02.01.2022 seeking the\nfollowing information:1. "Please provide complete leave details (including CL, SCL, EoL etc.) of all\n   Group A officers along with their name, designation, type of leave, duration of\n   leave (to and from dates) for the calendar year 2021.12. Is biometric attendance system resumed in DGICS? Yes or No. If yes, please\n   provide the date since its working. If No, reasons thereof.3. Names and designations of all employees who have taken more than 30\n   days leave in the calendar year 2021 along with the type of leave and\n   durations (to and from dates).4. Whether EL, HPL, EoL in part 1 and part 3 above has been entered in service\n   books for calendar year 2021? Yes or No. If No, please provide names of such\n   officers.5. Please provide copies of note sheet, OMs and other official letter related to\n   my email dated 12/11/21 addressed to[email protected]with subject\n   unauthorised absences of Souvik Naskar, Deputy Director Export. Please\n   provide copies of replies received from and issued to Sh Naskar on the above\n   issue.6. Has E-office implemented in DGCIS? Yes or No. If yes, please provide the\n   date since E-office is fully functional in DGCIS. If no, reasons thereof.7. Please provide names and designations of all Group B and lower levels\n   officers who have access to E-office. Out of this list, how many officers with\n   names and designations has processed at least 10 files in December 2021.8. What percentage of old physical files has been converted into digital files in\n   the last one year?9. Please provide names and designation of all employees who have applied\n   leave in the calendar year 2021 using e-office.10. Please provide names and designation of all employees who have applied\n   for tours in the calendar year 2021 using e-office.11. Please provide names and designation of all employees who have applied\n   for tours in the calendar year 2021 using physical files.12. Please provide TA bills along with all relevant documents that is needed to\n   conduct an official tour for the employees of DGCIS in the calendar year 2021."The CPIO furnished a point wise reply to the appellant on 31.01.2022. Being\ndissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 31.01.2022. FAA's order dated\n15.02.2022 held as under:-".........The CPIO has no intention not to provide the information. As per RTI Rule,\nthe information may be provided to the applicant's which are existing in this\noffice. So that CPIO informed you to come this office Administration Division and\ninspect the documents. For inspection of records, no fee for the first hour; and a\nfee of rupees five (Rs.5/-) for each subsequent hour (or fraction thereof) tinderRTI\nAct, 2005fees, cost & Rule in respect of point No. 1,3 &11- 12.\nPoint No. 2: No. The said system is suspended due to Government order,\nPoint No.5: No relevant document is available.2Point No 6: No, e-Office has not been fully implemented in DOGS. Reasons for 'No':e-Office is being implemented in a 'phase wise manner'. So, the File Management\npart of e-Office has been implemented first. Subsequently, implementation of\nother parts of e-Office has been taken up.Point No. 7:Information regarding 2nd part of the question: It is not possible from\nthe e-Office application to find out the required information, This is because the\nFile Management System of e-Office application does not have any functionality\nthrough which one can cull out the details of users with their frequency of usage.\nPoint No.8: It is under process."Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, the appellant approached the Commission with\nthe instant Second Appeal.Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:The following were present:-Appellant: Not present.Respondent: Shyamsundar Parul, Asstt. Director & CPIO present through video-\nconference.The Commission remarked at the outset that the instant Appeal has been filed by\nthe Appellant on the ground of non-receipt of desired information in response to\npoints no. 1,3, 7, 11 and 12 of RTI Application.The CPIO submitted that a point wise reply along with an opportunity of\ninspection was already offered to the Appellant; however, he did not avail of the\nsaid opportunity. In response to it, the Commission counselled the CPIO that the\ndetails of other officials as sought by the Appellant at points no. 1, 3, 7, 11 & 12\nare squarely hit bySection 8(1)(j)of RTI Act; therefore, offering opportunity of\ninspection to the Appellant in response to above said points without taking\nconsent/objection underSection 11of RTI Act was not appropriate and was\nagainst the provisions ofRTI Act.Decision:In furtherance of hearing proceedings, the Commission upon a perusal of facts on\nrecord observes that details of officials as sought for in the instant case through\npoints no. 1, 3, 7, 11 & 12 of RTI Application pertains to personal information of a\nthird party and thus is squarely hit bySection 8(1)(j)of RTI Act.In this regard,\nattention of the Appellant is drawn towards a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme\nCourt of India in the matter of Central Public Information Officer, Supreme Court3ofIndia vs. Subhash Chandra Agarwalin Civil Appeal No. 10044 of 2010 with\nCivil Appeal No. 10045 of 2010 and Civil Appeal No. 2683 of 2010 wherein the\nimport of "personal information" envisaged underSection 8(1)(j)of RTI Act has\nbeen exemplified in the context of earlier ratioslaid down bythe same Court in\nthe matter(s) of Canara Bank Vs. C.S. Shyamin Civil Appeal No.22 of 2009;Girish\nRamchandra Deshpande vs. Central Information Commissioner &Ors., (2013) 1\nSCC 212 and R.K. Jain vs. Union of India &Anr., (2013) 14 SCC 794.The following\nwas thus held:"59. Reading of the aforesaid judicial precedents, in our opinion, would\n       indicate that personal records, including name, address, physical, mental\n       and psychological status, marks obtained, grades and answer sheets,\n       are all treated as personal information. Similarly, professional records,\n       including qualification, performance, evaluation reports, ACRs,\n       disciplinary proceedings, etc. are all personal information. Medical\n       records, treatment, choice of medicine, list of hospitals and doctors\n       visited, findings recorded, including that of the family members,\n       information relating to assets, liabilities, income tax returns, details of\n       investments, lending and borrowing, etc. are personal information. Such\n       personal information is entitled to protection from unwarranted invasion\n       of privacy and conditional access is available when stipulation of larger\n       public interest is satisfied. This list is indicative and not exhaustive..."However, ignoring the aforesaid aspect, the CPIO has erred in giving the\nopportunity of relevant records of the concerned third parties to the Appellant\nwithout seeking their consent/objection underSection 11of RTI Act. In this\nregard, the CPIO is advised to exercise due diligence and follow due process of\nlaw as envisaged under theRTI Actbefore divulging any third party's exempted\ninformation.In view of the foregoing observations and considering the absence of the\nAppellant during hearing to buttress his case, no further relief can be granted in\nthe matter.The appeal is disposed of accordingly.Saroj Punhani (सरोज पुनहािन)\n                                                                          हािन)\n                                         Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु )4Authenticated true copy\n(अिभ मािणत स#यािपत  ित)\n\n(C.A. Joseph)\nDy. Registrar\n011-26179548/[email protected]सी. ए. जोसेफ, उप-पंजीयक\n दनांक /5