Professional Documents
Culture Documents
(RoomNo.315,BWing,AugustKrantiBhawan,BhikajiCamaPlace,NewDelhi110066)
Prof.M.SridharAcharyulu(MadabhushiSridhar)
InformationCommissioner
CIC/SA/A/2015/000038
YashpalArorav.PIO,TransportDepartment
ImportantDatesandtimetaken:
RTI:22.08.2014
Reply:08.09.2014
Time:17days
FAA:16.09.2014
FAO:22.10.2014
Time:36days
SA:18.12.2014
Hearing:18.05.2015
Decision:26.05.2015
Result:Disposedofwithdirection.
PartiesPresent:
1.
Appellantispresent.PublicauthorityisrepresentedbyShriSanjayDewan,PCO.
FACTS:
2.
Appellant through his RTI application sought information regarding his complaint
concerning fraud in issuing of caste certificate. PIO replied on 08.09.2014 stating that
informationsoughtisthirdparty.Beingunsatisfied,appellantfiledfirstappeal.FAAbyhis
orderdated22.10.2014directedthePIOtoprovidethenameoffinancer,numberanddateof
castecertificateaswellascomputerrecordsthatshowedhowmanypermitshadbeenallotted
onthebasisofcastecertificatetotheappellantwithin15days.Beingunsatisfiedwiththe
informationprovidedbyPIO,appellantapproachedtheCommission.
ProceedingsBeforetheCommission:
3.
addressoftheindividuals.Theappellantquestionedwhetheraddressinthecastecertificateis
thirdpartyinformationornot.Theofficerobjectedtodisclosureandsharingoftheaddressin
castecertificateandsaidthatitwouldbetheirpersonalinformation.Theappellantcontended
thathesuspectsthatsomepersonsmighthavefakecertificate,andtoverifythesame,he
needssuchinformation.
Inrelationtodisclosureofcastecertificate,theCommissionhasbeenoftheviewthat
whenapersonhasbeengivenajobforwhichthebasisofselectionhasbeenfulfillingthe
criteriaofcastereservation,itisonlypertinentthatitisalreadymadepublic.TheCommission
inCIC/SG/A/2008/00248/1596observedasfollows:
Whiledecidingthiscase,theCommissionagreeswiththecontentionoftheappellantthat
when a person is holding a public office, getting salary from the public exchequer and
discharging public functions in a public institution, therefore whatever documents she has
submittedinpursuanceofherappointmenttopublicofficeinapublicinstitutionfallsinpublic
domain.Theactofapplyingforajoboraselectionprocessisnotaprivateactivitybutis
clearlyaPublicactivity,anddisclosureofthedocumentsandpaperssubmittedtoobtainthe
jobcannotbeheldtobeaninvasiononprivacy.ThishasalsobeenheldbytheCommission
earlierindecisionCIC/WB/A/2007/00178,andtheCommissionagreeswiththesame.The
Commissionrespectfullydisagreeswiththedecisionsreliedonbythethirdparty.TheAppeal
isallowed.ThePIOwillprovidethecopiesofeducationalqualificationandcastecertificatesto
theappellantbefore28February2009.
The Commission after hearing the submissions made by both sides holds that when an
employee has been appointed in reserved category on the basis of caste certificates
produced by him, the certificates can no longer be termed as personal or third party
informationandmeritdisclosureandaccordinglydirectsthePIOtoprovidetheinformationas
soughtbytheAppellantsintheirRTIapplication.TheinformationtoreachtheAppellantby
31.1.2010andtheAppellantsaredirectedtosubmitacompliancereportby7.2.2010.
Havingheardthesubmissionandafterperusaloftherecord,theCommissionagrees
withtheobservationasstatedabove,thatthecastecertificateofapublicservantwhichforms
thebasisofhisselectionshouldbedisclosed.However,astheappellantinthepresentcaseis
allegingfraudinthemakingofthecastecertificateandisseekingactionbythedepartment
concerning the same. The Commission, therefore, requires the PIO to enquire the
genuineness of caste certificate presented by person mentioned in the RTI application /
complaintandsubmitthereportwithintwomonthsfromthedateofreceiptofthisorder.
Sd/-
(M.SridharAcharyulu)
InformationCommissioner
Authenticatedtruecopy
(BabuLal)
DeputyRegistrar
Addressesoftheparties:
1.
TheCPIOunderRTI,
AutoRickshawUnit,TransportDepartment,
Burari,Delhi110084.
2.
ShriYashpalArora,
B177/A,GaliNo.08,Bhajanpura,
Delhi110053.