Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
An RTI application was filed before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) of the Military Engineer Services by Mr. R.K. Malik who sought information about a certain GE (I) R&D letter. However, this application was rejected by the CPIO on the ground that the application did not contain any proof of identity. Hence, a second appeal for information was filed in the Central Information Commission (CIC). Noting to the grounds upon which the application was rejected, the Information commissioner Vanaja N. Sarana referred to an order passed by the court earlier in the case Amandeep Goyal v. Shipping Corp. of India Ltd., (File No. CIC/OK/C/2008/00016) where it was observed that Section 3 of the RTI Act provides that “all citizens have a right to information”, however, it has nowhere been mentioned that an enclosure of proof of identity is necessary while filing an RTI application. Hence, it is only in the “rarest of rare cases” where there is a doubt of citizenship of an applicant that the authority may ask him for proof.
In the present case, however, there arose no doubts about the applicant’s identity where his citizenship could be questioned, yet the application was rejected merely due to non-enclosure of identity proof. Relying on what was observed in the case mentioned above, it was reiterated by the CIC in the present case that an RTI application cannot be dismissed merely due to not annexing a proof of citizenship. The court directed the CPIO Garrison Engineer Office to provide complete information to the applicant within 15 days from the issue of the order. The court further issued a warning to the CPIO officer stating that such a kind of dismissal of applications where information is denied to the public is a blatant violation of the letter and spirit of the RTI Act.
86540
103860
630
114
59824