Ratio:
The details regarding the whereabouts or residential address of a pensioner from Government is not private information and the public are entitled to get it.

Heard both sides.

2. The petitioner has come forward to challenge the order of the third respondent, i.e. The Public Information Officer-cum-Superintendent of Post Offices, Gudur Division, State of Andhrapradesh, challenging the order, dated 15. 2008 which was confirmed by the second respondent vide his order, dated 7. 2008 and the first respondents order dated 5. 2009. After setting aside those orders the petitioner wanted the information sought in his application, dated 13. 2008 under Section 6 of the Right To Information Act (for short RTI Act).

3. In his representation, dated 13. 2008, the petitioner sought for an information relating to one K.Ramachandra Rao, a retired time-scale Sub-Post Master, who was drawing his pension from Gudur Head Post Office, Nellore District. In the residential address of the said person given in the official document, i.e. No.4/7/156, Nelcost Road, Gudur, Nellore District, State of Andhrapradesh, he was not available. The reason why the petitioner wanted to know his address was that the petitioner had secured a judgment and decree against him before the VII Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai in O.S.No.764 of 1997, dated 112. 1998. The petitioner wanted to execute the decree. Therefore, he wanted his address. However, the petitioner was informed that the information sought for cannot be granted to him since the reasons adduced by him were not convincing and the representation related to private litigation cases between the petitioner and the retired pensioner Ramachandra Rao and it did not come under the purview of a Public Interest Litigations.

4. The petitioner filed an appeal against the said order to the second respondent. In the appeal, the petitioner stated that the said Ramachandra Rao had committed forgery and the Court had also awarded costs in his civil suit. Therefore, he was not able to take further civil and criminal action against him. The appellate authority dismissed the appeal in terms of Section 8(1)(j) r/w Section 11 of the Act. It was stated that there is no relationship with any public activity or interest and the information sought for related to a third party. Such information cannot be furnished as no public interest was involved.

.5. The petitioner filed a second appeal, dated 27. 2008 before the first respondent. It was stated that the information is required for the legal prosecution of Government of Indias pensioner. The said person is liable for criminal prosecution. Hence the information sought for was neither prohibited under Section 8(j) nor under 8(d) of the RTI Act.

.6. The first respondent, by an order, dated 5. 2009 in paragraph 5 held as follows:

."5. The Commission observed, based on the documents provided, that there is a private litigation case between the Appellant and Mr. Ramachandra Rao and that there is no relationship of the disclosure with any public activity or interest and is of the opinion that the address can be provided by the Court to the Applicant, if required and denies the information under Section 8(1)(g) of the RTI Act."

7. It is this order which is under challenge. Notice was issued to the respondents. The third respondent had also filed a counter affidavit, dated 29. 2009, justifying the denial of information. In paragraphs 21 and 22 of the counter affidavit, it was averred as follows:

"21. I submit that the petitioner states that no prejudice will be caused to the said pensioner Sri.K.Ramachandra Rao if his residence address is furnished and he is liable for criminal prosecution for having committed forgery in production of promissory note. This department is no way connection with these things.

22. I submit that there is no violation of Article 14,16 & 19 of Constitution of India as alleged in this para since the information was not furnished as it relates to personal information and has not relationship to any public activity or interest under Section 8(1)J of RTI Act, 2005 (Annexure-R2)."

8. The short question