CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION

Appeal No.ICPB/A-9/CIC/2006
April 3, 2006

In the matter of Right to Information Act, 2005 - Sections 18

Name of the Appellant : Shri Bhagwan Chand Saxena

Name of Public Authority: Export Inspection Council of India,

Ministry of Commerce.

DECISION

FACTS OF THE CASE:

By an application dated 5.11.2005 addressed to the CPIO of the

above public authority, the appellant sought for copies of the bio-data
submitted by 4 candidat3es at the time of their appointment as
Assistant Directors and also of copies of the medical reports submitted
by the medical authorities declaring these candidates as fit/unfit. By a
communication dated 16.12.2005, the CIPO declined to furnish the
information on the ground that disclosure would not serve any public
purpose and also held that the same cannot be disclosed under section
8(f) of RTI Act. On appeal to the appellate authority, he also denied the
information on the ground that the information sought had no
relationship with any public activity or interest and if provided it
would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individuals.
He relied on Section 8(j) of the Act for his decision.

Grounds of appeal :

The reliance of the CPIO on Section 8(f) is misplaced as this

section deals with information received in confidence from foreign
government. The information sought by the appellant is in the public
interest as only medically fit persons can be appointed to a public post
and as to the knowledge of the appellant, one of the candidates had
been declared medically unfit and by appointing such candidates, fraud
has been committed in public appointment. He has also sought for
taking action against the CPIO and the appellate authority for
concealing the information sought.

COMMSSION’S DECISION:

Comments of the public authority were called for on the appeal.

It is stated in the comments, that since the information sought related to
third parties, notices were issued to them to indicate whether
information sought could be furnished to the appellant and all of them
objected. Therefore, the CPIO rejected the request under section 8(j) of
the Act, but had inadvertently referred to Section 8(f). The appellate
authority also concurred with the decision of CPIO. It is further
mentioned that the case of one of the candidates (Shri Jaypalan) is sub-
judice before Delhi High Court.

When a candidate submits his application for appointment to a

post under a public authority, the same becomes a public document and
he cannot object to the disclosure on the ground of invasion of privacy.
Every citizen has the right to know whether the candidate fulfils the
criteria for the post, which could be checked from the application/bio-
data. Therefore, I direct the CPIO to furnish copies of the bio-data
submitted by the 4 candidates as requested by the appellant within 15
days of this decision. As far as the medical reports are concerned, they
are purely personal to the individuals and furnishing of copies of the
same would amount to invasion of privacy of the individuals and
therefore need not be furnished. However, the CPIO will disclose to the
appellant the information whether all the four candidates had been
declared as medically fit or not.

Let a copy of this decision be sent to the appellant and the CPIO.

Sd/-
( Padma Balasubramanian)
Information Commissioner

Authenticated true copy:

Sd/-
( Prem K. Gera )
Registrar

Address of parties :
1. Shri Bhagwan Chand Saxena, 23/89, East Azad Nagar, Delhi
110051.
2. Shri S.K. Tandon, Public Information Officer, Export Inspection
Council of India, 3rd Floor, YMCA Cultural Centre Building, 1
Jaisingh Road, New Delhi 110001.