Disclosure of information that impedes ongoing investigations is exempt under RTI Act, reaffirming the confidentiality of disciplinary proceedings.

Information sought:

1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 02.01.2024 (offline) seeking the following information:

“1. Kind reference is solicited to the letter second cited. It is mentioned therein that:

"The reference (in para 5.3.2of the letter of undersigned dated 24.11.2023, addressed to you), to general examination by the erstwhile Disciplinary Authority, is from the report of the erstwhile Disciplinary Authority to ADG(Vig.) (South) Chennai which is a "confidential" document."

2. As per the provisions of section 6(1) of the RTI Act, 2005, I request you to kindly furnish a copy of the said report of the erstwhile Disciplinary Authority made in respect of me in the Disciplinary Proceedings for which I enclose a Postal Order for Rs 10/- in No.50F 019205, dt. 02.01.2024 drawn in favour of A.O., Oo Pr.CIT(VU)-1, Coimbatore towards the application fee. I may be informed of the copying fee to be paid in respect of the report, as per Rule, at an early date to enable me to pay the same.

3. In this connection, I am to state that information received in confidence from a foreign Government only is exempt u/s 8(1)(f) of RTI Act and hence I am entitled to be furnished a copy of the report, which relates to me and is part of the proceedings against me. Further, there is no exemption available to the Disciplinary Authority from disclosing any material relating to me as it is not part of the Authorities specified in the Second Schedule to the RTI Act, 2005.

4. I also state that even erstwhile Confidential Reports have been given a go by and replaced by the APAR in transparent procedure of Government. Section 22 of the Act has overriding powers over the provisions of Official Secrets Act and other Acts.

5. Actually, the erstwhile Disciplinary Authority had forwarded a copy of the Inquiry Officer's report and I was asked to offer my comments and representations thereof. I complied with the same. Apparently as seen from the reference second cited, the erstwhile Disciplinary Authority should have sent his report to ADG(Vig). South after considering my comments in response and my representation thereon. However, I am again given a copy of 1.0.'s report and the Disciplinary Authorities difference of views with the LO.'s report. In this process, a reference also is made to the report of the Erstwhile Disciplinary Authority and I am asked to submit my response. Hence natural justice and fair play requires that I should be informed of the contents of the report of the erstwhile Disciplinary Authority which is relied upon and referred to in the references cited. It is part of the continuous proceedings under consideration now.I do not remember nor am able to recollect what I orally said before the erstwhile Disciplinary Authority. I also enclose copy of the Central Information Commission decision in Shri.S.P.Pream Kamel vs Directorate General of Income tax (Vigilance), dt. 27.06.2022 for the proposition that once a document is relied upon or stated in reference, the connected document must be furnished. Hence, I request you not to refuse but to furnish the information sought for.

6. Even though I am not bound to disclose the reasons for requesting information, as per section 6(2) of the Act, the same is required for me to submit my response to the Disciplinary Authority as required in the reference 1 cited, which is now allowed to be filed within 10 days of receipt of the second reference which I received on 01-01-2024. Kindly expedite furnishing of the information.”

2. The CPIO furnished a point-wise reply to the Appellant on 18.01.2024 stating as under:

“1. Vide the application cited above, the applicant Shri J Rajasekharan, ITO. Ver