Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(CIC) 1293

CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Sudha Rani Relangi, Information Commissioner
Arvind Bhatt – Appellant
Versus
CPIO, Dr. Harisingh Gaur University, Sagar – Respondent
CIC/DHGVV/A/2024/626568|CIC/DHGVV/A/2024/626567|CIC/DHGVV/A/2024/626566|CIC/DHGVV/A/2024/626565|CIC/DHGVV/A/2024/626561|CIC/DHGVV/A/2024/626560|CIC/DHGVV/A/2024/626558|CIC/DHGVV/A/2024/626559|CIC/DHGVV/A/2024/626556|CIC/DHGVV/A/2024/626552|CIC/DHGVV/A/2024/626550|CIC/DHGVV/A/2024/626547|CIC/DHGVV/A/2024/626549

Application forms with marksheets in recruitment processes are exempt personal information under RTI Section 8(1)(j); no disclosure absent larger public interest. Proactive disclosure of recruitment details mandated on websites.

Headnote:(A) Right to Information Act, 2005 - Sections 2(f), 4(1), 8(1)(e), 8(1)(j), 11, 19(1), 20, 25(5) - Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 - Section 44(3) - Multiple second appeals clubbed - Information sought regarding recruitment process including application forms, marksheets, and supporting documents of candidates - CPIO denied disclosure citing personal information of third parties exempt under Section 8(1)(j) - FAA directed disclosure of specific point - Commission held application forms with supporting documents qualify as personal information exempt from disclosure; list of candidates already provided - No larger public interest established for overriding exemption - Amendment removing public interest override noted - Directed proactive disclosure under Section 4(1) of recruitment details on website to reduce RTI burden. (Paras 67-76)

(B) Right to Information Act, 2005 - Section 4(1) - Proactive disclosure - Public authorities obligated to suo motu publish recruitment advertisements, list of selected candidates, qualifications, and related information on official websites to promote transparency and minimize RTI applications - Recommendation under Section 25(5) to Vice-Chancellor for compliance with compliance report within six weeks. (Paras 73-75)

Facts of the case:
Appellant filed multiple RTI applications seeking details of recruitment processes for faculty positions including candidate application forms, marksheets, and supporting documents. CPIO denied as personal/third-party information under Sections 8(1)(j) and 11. FAA partially allowed. Second appeals challenged denial citing public interest due to alleged irregularities. Respondent countered appellant's motives and affirmed exemption post-DPDP amendment.

Findings of Court:
Application forms containing personal details exempt from disclosure; no intervention warranted as candidate lists provided. Recommended enhanced proactive disclosures on recruitment to ensure transparency.

Issues: (1) Whether candidate application forms with marksheets etc. exempt as personal information under Section 8(1)(j); (2) Compliance with mandatory proactive disclosure norms under Section 4(1).

Ratio Decidendi: Personal records in application forms constitute exempt personal information warranting privacy protection absent demonstrated larger public interest; appellate forums uphold such denials per judicial precedents. Public authorities must proactively disclose recruitment information online.

Result: Appeals disposed of; no further intervention on disclosure; recommendations issued for proactive disclosure.

Table of Content
1. rti timelines and cpio/faa responses identical across appeals (Para 1 , 2 , 3)

Information sought:

1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 18.01.2024 seeking the following information:

2. Having not received any response from the CPIO, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 19.02.2024.

3. Meanwhile, the CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 19.03.2024 stating as under:

“1. The applications submitted by the candidates including copies of marks sheet are the personal information and no larger public interest is involved in its disclosure and as such it is exempted from disclosure under Section 8 (1)(j) of RTI, Act 2005.

2. Information pertains to third party and no larger public interest involves in it and as such it is exempted from disclosure under Section 11 of RTI Act, 2005.

3. Please refer reply at serial no. 02. 4. Please refer reply at serial no. 02. 5. Please refer reply at serial no. 02.

6. The applications submitted by the candidates including copies of marks sheet are the personal information and no larger public interest is involved in its disclosure and as such it is exempted from disclosure under Section 8 (1)(j) of RTI, Act 2005.

4. The FAA vide its order dated 22.03.2024 disposed of the First Appeal directing the CPIO to furnish relevant information at point No. 3 of RTI application within 15 days.

2. CIC/DHGVV/A/2024/626567

Relevant facts emerging from appeal:

RTI application filed on : 18.01.2024

CPIO replied on : 19.03.2024

First appeal filed on : 19.02.2024

First Appellate Authority’s order : 22.03.2024

2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 19.06.2024

Information sought:

5. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 18.01.2024 seeking the following information:

6. Having not received any response from the CPIO, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 19.02.2024.

7. Meanwhile, the CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 19.03.2024 stating as under:

2. Information pertains to third party and no larger public interest involves in it and as such it is exempted from disclosure under Section 11 of RTI Act, 2005.

3. Please refer reply at serial no. 02. 4. Please refer reply at serial no. 02. 5. Please refer reply at serial no. 02.

8. FAA vide its order dated 22.03.2024 disposed of the First Appeal directing the CPIO to furnish relevant information at point No. 3 of RTI application within 15 days.

3. CIC/DHGVV/A/2024/626566

Relevant facts emerging from appeal:

RTI application filed on : 18.01.2024

CPIO replied on : 19.03.2024

First appeal filed on : 19.02.2024

First Appellate Authority’s order : 22.03.2024

2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 19.06.2024

Information sought:

9. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 18.01.2024 seeking the following information:

10. Having not received any response from the CPIO, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 19.02.2024.

11. Meanwhile, the CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 19.03.2024 stating as under:

2. Information pertains to third party and no larger public interest involves in it and as such it is exempted from disclosure under Section 11 of RTI Act, 2005.

3. Please refer reply at serial no. 02. 4. Please refer reply at serial no. 02. 5. Please refer reply at serial no. 02.

6. The applications submitted by the candidates includ

Click Here to Read the rest of this document