Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
The Delhi HC held that a Public Information Officer(PIO) cannot deny any information under the Right to Information Act 2005(RTI Act) on the ground that authentic information is available with another authority.
The aforesaid was held by Justice VibhuBhakru while dismissing writ petition filed by PIO of Commissioner of Police, Delhi, that challenged the direction of Central Information Commission (CIC) to permit the applicant to inspect documents in relation to the information sought under the RTI Act.
The applicant had sought information pertaining to the complaints forwarded by Delhi Police to Municipal Corporation of Delhi(MCD) from 01.01.2011 to 26.11.11. The application was rejected by PIO on the basis that the authentic information regarding unauthorised construction was available with MCD. This rejection was initially upheld by the CIC on 05.07.2013 but later, the applicant filed another application, seeking information with respect to complaints/intimations sent by the Delhi police to the Municipal Corporation of Delhi from 01.01.2010 to 25.08.2012 regarding the unauthorized fresh construction of buildings. Though the PIO disclosed the number of complaints forwarded, he withheld further information on the ground that it pertains to third parties under Section 11 of RTI Act. In appeal, the CIC directed the PIO to enable inspection of the relevant files and provide photocopies of the relevant documents, as per order dated 20.01.2014.
The PIO filed a writ petition challenging this order. It was contended that the impugned order of the CIC was contradictory to the first order of the CIC and also that the Police does not form any opinion regarding the unauthorized construction, as it was for the MCD to decide that, and thus, the information was available with MCD.
The Court observed that the applicant was seeking information regarding complaints forwarded by the Police and held that the fact that more authentic information is available with MCD is not an enough ground for PIO of Police Department to withhold information.
In terms of the RTI Act, all information that is available with the public authority is required to be provided to the citizen unless exempted from disclosure under Section 8 of the RTI Act or otherwise related to the organizations that are excluded from the purview of the RTI Act. The Court was also not impressed by the contention that Section 11 barred disclosure of third party information. It was held that Section 11 does not prohibit disclosure of third party information; rather, it aims to facilitate the furnishing of such third party information subject to the consent of the third party.
Additionally, the Court held that the information regarding the complaints forwarded by the Police to the MCD cannot be treated as confidential third party information.
86540
103860
630
114
59824