You are on page 1of 5

TEP Complaint to FM Against Smt 498a family

Reference No Dated:

To,

The Central Public Information Officer


_________________________________

Sub: - First Appeal under 19 (1) of RTI Act, 2005

My Reference Letter No: _________dated _________.

Your Reference Letter No:__________ dated________

Sir,

1. The appellant is constrained to file a First Appeal u/s 19 (1) of RTI Act to your
esteemed office against not providing information.

The brief FACTS of this matter are:-

a. That the appellant has submitted TEP under reference no_________dated


________ & RTI application under reference no ____________dated _________ in
the office of Commissioner of IncomeTax ,Lucknow (Attached as Annexure-A).

My GROUNDS for the appeal are as follows:-

a) BECAUSE, The information sought falls within the ambit of RTI Act 2005 and the
information is existing therein and can be provided as per Honble High Court of Delhi
decision in regard of Bhagat Singh Vs Chief Information Commissioner & Others WP(C)
No. 3114/2007 dated 03/12/2007(Attached as Annexure C).

b) BECAUSE, The Honorable High Court of Delhi in the Case of Neera Singh Vs the
State (State Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Others-CRL.M.C.7262/2006-23-02-2007 Copy
(Attached As Annexure-D) has given ruling for such investigations in matter involving
huge dowry amounts. (Attached as Annexure D).

c) BECAUSE, The information sought falls within the ambit of RTI Act 2005 and the
information is existing therein and can be provided as per Honble High Court of Delhi
decision in regard of Director of Income tax (Investigation) and others Vs Bhagat Singh
LPA No. 3114/2007 dated 17/12/2007. The information asked is only furnished by
Income Tax Department and it required expediently in the interest of Justice. (Attached as
Annexure E)

d) BECAUSE, Under the provision of act if the application was rejected by the PIO
himself and not by any other authority, in the instance case my application under section
6 has not been rejected by PIO himself but by any other third officer who is not the
competent authority.

e) BECAUSE, PIO has not acted judicially after applying his mind as per provision of act
since mere writing _____________ dated ________
2009 which says that information sought by you is of third party
information, which cannot be provided to you and therefore your
petition is rejected u/s 8(1)(J) of RTI act is not and cannot be a justify ground. The
rejection should have been speaking order that how the information is a third party.

f) BECAUSE, as per provision of the act before the rejection of the application on the
ground of the third party information the PIO should asked the third party and also should
have given me a opportunity to present my case.

g) BECAUSE, the large public interest which overwrites the third party interest, the PIO
has failed to act so.

h) BECAUSE, On the same kind of application CPIO Office of Commissioner of Income


Tax Delhi has provided the details asked by applicants.

i) BECAUSE, the PIO has failed to access the information available to him in his
statutory capacity as PIO u/s 5(1) of RTI Act read with 5 (4) and 5 (5) of the RTI Act.

j) BECAUSE, the PIO failed to invoke the provision of section 10 of the act why
invoking the provisions of 8(1)(J).

k) Since total expenditure of Rs _______ lacs ( lacs only) has been claimed by in
Shri XYZ , so it is a natural curiosity that what was the source of fund .If you disclose it
then doubt of black money will be removed from my mind and this way the information
will fulfill the objective of RTI to check the corruption as said by Hon'ble justice Shri
Pradeep Kant in the recent judgement under Writ Petition No. 3262 (MB) of 2008,Public
Information Officer Vs. State Information Commission, U.P. and others,

l) It becomes increasingly imminent and added responsibility of the concerned authorities


to make an enquiry into such allegations and ascertain the actual truth behind the true
source, if any, of these alleged payments / expenses, so as that innocent people like me
does not get harassed due to the ultier motives of some mischievous people.

m) The objective of the RTI act is to provide information to the person who sought such
information and when the case involves a serious question whereby the applicant seeks
the information to better defend himself in the court of law the information sought
becomes more important. Since criminal jurisprudence, it is clear that innocent person
should not be convicted and a person is presumed innocent unless found guilty/convicted.
Since, it is very important principle of natural justice that against whom a complaint has
been made has every right to know its contents so as to defend himself effectively and to
prove that the complainant has approached various authorities only with an oblique
motive. Thus in the process defaming the undersigned and causing the undersigned
mental agony and harassment.

n) That the refusal on the part of the Respondent No. 1 is without any justification and
disclosure of the information would have NO effect to any public activity and would not
be an unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual.

o) That the respondent cannot refrain from disclosing the information on baseless pleas of
public interest or invasion of privacy or information falls under category of IIIrd party
when the issue involved is of serious nature as in the present case F.I.R. has been
registered against the undersigned / appellant.

p) That under the Universal Declaration of the Human Rights adopted by the united
nation in 1948 assured by article 19 that every one has right to seek, receive and impart
information and ideas through any media, regardless of the frontiers.

q) That in Secretary, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Govt. of India and others
Vs. Cricket Association of Bengal and others, 1995(2) SCC 161 the Honble Apex Court
has remarks about this right in the following term:-
a. The right to freedom of speech and expression includes the right to receive and impart
information. For ensuring the free speech right of the citizens of this country, it is
necessary that the citizens have the benefits of plurality of views and a range of opinions
on all public issues. A successful democracy posits an aware citizenry. Diversity of
opinions, views, ideas and ideologies is essential to enable the citizens to arrive at
informed judgement on all issues touching them.

r) Those by refusing the information sought, the respondent will defeat the object of the
act i.e. RTI for which it was created. The object of the Act is to provide for setting out the
practical regime of the right to information for citizens to secure access to information
under the control of public authorities, in order to promote transparency and
accountability in the working of every public authority. The constitution of India has
established democratic republic and democracy requires an informed citizenry and
transparency of information which are vital to its functioning and also to contain the
corruption and to hold governments and their instrumentalities accountable to the
governed. Therefore, it is expedient to provide for furnishing certain information to
citizens who desire to have it.

s) That by refusing the information, the respondent has completely disregarded the
fundamental right under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India, the appellant most
respectfully submits that the right to information was explicitly held to be a fundamental
right under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India for the first time by Justice K. K.
Methew in State of U.P. Vs. Raj Narain 1975 4 SCC 428.

t) That access to information under section 3 of the Act is the rule and exemption under
section 11, the exception. Mere saying that the information would invade anybodys
privacy and falls under the category of IIIrd party is no ground to deny the information to
those who require the said information for suitably protecting their fundamental rights as
well as to protect them selves from the rigmarole of trial. By refusal of the information,
the respondent is trying to dodge the appellant of his reasonable demand for the
information.

u) That the right based enactment is akin to welfare measure and the act should receive a
liberal interpretation and therefore the appellant be granted the information forthwith
without any legal wrangles and complications.

v) That the appellant has come on the very first opportunity available to him and
therefore the information should not be denied to him. More over the appellant does not
wants to use the information for any oblique motive but wants to use the information to
better defend himself.

w) That the refusal on the part of the respondent would only encourage more and more
mischievous persons to make false, frivolous and totally baseless complaints against the
responsible citizens of the country, in order to settle their personal scores and harass and
put them under severe mental agony at the hands of the system. Had this information
been provided at the very first instance, the appellant/undersigned would have provided
the authorities with the vital truth about the whole case and the complete matter would
have taken the turn on its head.

x) That the refusals on the part of the respondent show the lackadaisical approach and
therefore the appellant request your good self to initiate action against the respondent
under section 20 of the RTI Act.

y) Whether the respondent no.1 has complied with section 11(1) of the RTI Act-2005 and
whether the respondent no.1 given a written notice to the third party, It is reasonable
apprehension of the appellant that no such notice as is required under section 11(1) of the
RTI Act has been issued to Shri. XYZ and refusal of information by the respondent no.1
to the appellant is bad in law and is contrary to the objective of the RTI Act 2005 and
the respondent no.1 has used a flip-flop tactics to deny information to the appellant. Since
the information sought is neither a trade nor commercial secret protected by any law nor
the sought information disclosure would be contrary to public interest.

According the appellant is constrained to PRAY for the following relief:


In view of the above it is therefore prayed that:
i. Kindly provide the appellant with the copy of the information sought of by the
appellant in his application so as to better defend himself.
ii. The appellant has enclosed a copy of relevant judgments in which Honorable High
Court of Delhi has given ruling for such investigations in matter involving huge dowry
amounts with application of dated 11th June, 2009.(attached as Annexure C & D with
application of dated 11th June,2009)
iii. That the PIO be ordered to provide the appellant the requested information forthwith.
iv. That a personal hearing be afforded to the appellant u/s 19(5) of RTI Act and interests
of natural justice in the event the PIO opts to justify and/ or prove the willful denial of
information to the appellant.
v. That a copy of comments/ reply of PIO, if any, to this First Appeal be provided to the
appellant well in advance of the hearing date.

Further for contesting the election every candidate is required to provide information
regarding his property/assets during filing of nomination which is disclosed even in news
papers and media so that every citizen can know the assets of the candidate. When such
rigorous norms are fixed for Candidates for elections, who are in service for only the
limited term of their office, the government servants, engaged in life long service cannot
be exempted. Rather I am of the opinion that the public authorities should Suo Moto
publish these information in their official websites under Section 4 of the RTI Act. This
action is expected in the light of decision of Honble Supreme Court of India in Civil
Appeal No. 7178 of 2001- Union of India Vs Association for Democratic Reforms and
another.

Yours Faithfully,
Husband
Add:
Mobile

Verification

I, the deponent named herein do verify that the facts as narrated above are true and
corrent to my best knowledge and belief.

Deponent
Enclosures Annexure: ( A to G)

Annexure- A: - RTI application RTI


Annexure- B: - Copy of letter from city
Annexure- C: - Copy of Honble High Court order WP(C) No. 3114/2007.
Annexure- D :- Copy of Honble High Court Judgment CRL.M.C.7762/2006.
Annexure -E: - Copy of Honble High Court order
Annexure- F: - Copy of FIR Submitted by My Wife .
Annexure-G: - Copy of TEP