Disclosure of personal information under RTI requires explicit consent from the candidate, balancing public interest and privacy provisions.

C A V Order

1. Since common question of law and facts are involved in both writ petitions, they are heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.

Writ Petition No. 2759 of 2025

2. Chhattisgarh Public Service Commission has filed this petition against the order dated 16.01.2025 passed by Chhattisgarh State Information Commission (hereinafter referred to Commission) by which S.A. bearing No. A/4396/2024/ Raigarh filed by the respondent No. 2 has been allowed and the Commission has directed the petitioner to provide information relating to the selected candidate Shailesh Kumar Patel regarding his 15 years of teaching or academic experience with grade pay of Rs. 7,000 or 8 years of experience of teaching or academic experience with grade pay of Rs. 8,000/-. The petitioner has also sought certified copy of the Ph.D degree of Shailendra Kumar Patel.

Writ Petition No. 2761 of 2025

3. Chhattisgarh Public Service Commission has filed this petition against the order dated 27.01.2025 passed by Chhattisgarh State Information Commission (hereinafter referred to Commission) by which S.A. bearing No. A/3830/2023/ Raigarh filed by the respondent No. 2 has been allowed and the Commission has directed the petitioner to provide information relating to the selected candidate Shailesh Kumar Patel regarding his 15 years of teaching or academic experience with grade pay of Rs. 7,000 or 8 years of experience of teaching or academic experience with grade pay of Rs. 8,000/-. The petitioner has also sought certified copy of the Ph.D degree of Shailendra Kumar Patel.

4. Brief facts as reflected from the records of both the writ petitions in brief, are that (a) Public Service Commission (hereinafter referred to PSC) has initiated selection process for appointment of Assistant Registrar in the University wherein Dr. Shailendra Patel was selected on the aforesaid post and the respondent No. 2 was wait list candidate. The PSC after finalizing the examination has forwarded the list of selected candidate to the appointing authority/ Secretary Higher Education Department for appointment. Thereafter, respondent No.2 moved an application on 19.04.2023 wherein he has sought following information which reads as under:-

(c) The Information Officer, Chhattisgarh Public Service Commission vide memo dated 19.04.2023 and 29.04.2024 has declined to provide information to the information seekers on the account that these information are personal information relating to third person, therefore, as per Section 8 (1) (J) of Right to Information Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to Act, 2005) same cannot be furnished to him as he has not granted the consent to provide the information to respondent No.2. Being aggrieved with these orders, both the respondents have preferred First Appeal before the Appellate Authority under RTI, office of the Public Service Commission, Raipur. The Appellate Authority vide its order dated 23.05.2023 in appeal No. 7-A/2023 in appeal No. 33/2024 decided on 31.05.2024 has rejected the same.

(d) Being aggrieved with these orders, respondent No. 2 (in both the cases) has preferred the appeal before the State Information Commission mainly contending that the First Appellate Court malafidely has wrongly interpreted Section 8 (1) (J) of the Act, 2005 and has declined to supply information to the petitioner, as such impugned order passed by the Information Officer and First Appellate Authority are illegal and liable to be quashed.

5. It is further contended that since the information sought by the respondent No. 2 is not personal information and it does not interfere in the privacy of a person, therefore, the information should have been pro