Re: [HumJanenge] Disclosure of Annual Property Statement of Officer is exempted under RTI Act, says Odisha Chief Information Commissioner.

i agree that this case has to be challenged in high court

On 8/9/12, krishnan nambudiri <knknambudiri@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yes.This dicision is baseless. it should be challenged in HC
>
>
> On 7 August 2012 18:31, Pradip Pradhan <pradippradhan63@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> *Disclosure of Annual Property Statement of Officer is exempted under
>> RTI Act, says Tarun Kanti Mishra, Odisha Chief Information Commissioner.*
>>
>> * Bhubaneswar*: While disposing a complaint petition (CC No-1772/2010)
>> on
>> 30.7.12, Mr. Tarun Kanti Mishra , State Chief Information Commissioner
>> Annual Property Statement of an Officer can not be disclosed under
>> section 8(1)(j) and 8(1)(e) of the RTI Act.
>>
>> Mr. Pradip Pradhan, RTI Applicant had submitted application to the PIO ,
>> Department of Industries, Odisha, Cuttack seeking information regarding
>> property statement of B.B.Dhal, General Manager, DIC, Ganjam , no. of
>> Govt. residential quarters allotted in favour of DIC, Ganjam and list
>> of present occupant of these quarters etc. On receiving the
>> information, the PIO transferred application to the PIO, Directorate of
>> Industries to provide the information to the applicant. On 6.8.2010,
>> the PIO intimated to the applicant that the property statement of
>> B.B.Dhal, General Manager is not available in the Directorate. For
>> balance information, the PIO requested the General Manager , DIC Ganjam
>> to
>> provide the information. The PIO, DIC, Ganjam provided the information
>> except property statement of B.B.Dhal, General Manager.
>>
>> Finding no information about said property statement, Mr. Pradip
>> Pradhan filed a complaint petition to the State Information Commission.
>> Mr. Tarun Kanti Mishra heard the case and disposed it on 30.7.12. The
>> Commission observed that property statement is retained by the public
>> authority in sealed cover under proper secrecy and used only when the
>> public servant faces a charge or an enquiry. It can not be said as a
>> public information. Such information furnished to various public
>> authorities by the public servant remains confidential. It is covered
>> under
>> section 8(1)(j) of the Act and can not be routinely disclosed. The
>> property statement is also attracted the exemption under section 8
>> (1)(e) of the RTI Act.
>>
>> Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act says " information which relates to
>> personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship for
>> any public authority to any public activity or interest , or which
>> would
>> cause unwarranted invasion of privacy of the individual can not be
>> disclosed unless public information officer or the appellate authority
>> , as the case may be , is satisfied that the larger public interest
>> justifies
>> the disclosure of such information."
>>
>> Section 8(1)(e) of the Act says "information available to a person in
>> his fiduciary relationship can not be disclosed , unless the competent
>> authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the
>> disclosure of such information"
>>
>> *Being disturbed and dissatisfied with the decision of the
>> Commission, Mr. Pradhan says this decision is against letter and
>> spirit of RTI Act and he thinks of challenging it in Odisha High
>> Court. *
>>
>> *
>> *
>>
>> *Pradip Pradhan*
>>
>> *M-99378-43482*
>>
>> *Date- 7.8.12*
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> K.N.K.Namboodiri
> Choma Elamon Mana,
> Chathakulam-PO
> Poruvazhi-,Kollam Dist
> Pin 690520
> Mob.9447470073
>


--
Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
1722, Sector 14, Hisar-125001, INDIA
Phone: 91-99929-31181