के (cid:574)ीयसूचनाआयोग Central Information Commission बाबागंगनाथमाग(cid:330), मुिनरका

Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka नईिद(cid:671)ी, New Delhi – 110067 File No: CIC/CBSED/A/2025/611330 VIKAS SINGH .….अपीलकता(cid:330)/Appellant VERSUS बनाम CPIO, CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION, RTI Cell, P.S., 1-2, INDUSTRIAL AREA, I. P.

EXTENSION, PATPARGANJ,DELHI-110092 ….(cid:366)ितवादीगण /Respondent Date of Hearing : 23.02.2026 Date of Decision : 23.02.2026 INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Sudha Rani Relangi Relevant facts emerging from appeal:

RTI application filed on : 30.10.2024 CPIO replied on : 11.11.2024 First appeal filed on : 15.11.2024 First Appellate Authority’s order : 06.12.2024

2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : Nil Information sought:

1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 30.10.2024 seeking the following information:

“1)SEEKING STATUS AND UPDATES ON A COMPLAINT I RAISED ON

08/09/2023 TO CHIEF VIGILANCE OFFICER CBSE.

2)In Ravinder Balani vs Union of India 2009 the CIC ruled that a spouse is not considered 3rd party under the RTI Act & has the right to obtain information about their spouse especially when legal proceedings are involved.The information requested is in public interest when it involves the disclosure of identity or forgery.

SUPREME COURT LANDMARK CASE OF CBSE VS ADITYA BANDOPADHYAY 2011 RULED THAT PUBLIC AUTHORITIES MUST DISCLOSE INFORMATION THAT IS NECESSARY FOR LEGAL INVESTIGATIONS OR EVIDENCE IN A COURT OF LAW. IN ARUN KUMAR GUPTA VS CBSE 2017 CIC RULED THAT EDUCATIONAL CERTIFICATES & RECORDS ARE NOT INHERENTLY EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE UNDER THE RTI ACT WHEN SUCH INFORMATION IS NECESSARY FOR LEGAL PROCEEDINGS. SEEKING COPY OF DATE OF BIRTH, ID PROOF & SCHOOL DOCUMENTS WHICH WERE USED BY LAXMI JAYANT A/C TO TC PROVIDED BY SENIOR NAVYUG SCHOOL.

3)Dhananjay Sharma vs State of Haryana 1995 Supreme Court held that fabrication of documents to deceive courts or authorities is a criminal offense, and such forgery must be exposed, even if it involves personal documents. Aadhar card & Passport of Anjali jayant has been terminated on submitting TC of Senior Navyug School of Laxmi Jayant-DOB 22/08/89 to the Authority & in ongoing critical investigations of Forgery of School,College,Official Documents at Shahbad Dairy Police Station. In Subhash Chandra Agarwal vs Supreme Court of India 2010 held the 3^rd party information can be shared if it involves public interest & relates to criminal offenses like forgery or fraud. Girish Ramchandra Deshpande vs CIC 2012 held that 3rd party personal information can be disclosed if there is a larger public interest involved. In cases of forgery, fraud, or criminal misconduct, personal information can be accessed to prove innocence or as evidence in a legal matter.

SEEKING ALL DOCUMENTS WHICH WERE USED BY LAXMI JAYANT FOR TAKING ADMISSION AND USED IN NAVYUG SCHOOL RECORDS FROM

10/04/95 TO 29/04/99.

4)SEEKING RESULT & EDUCATIONAL DOCUMENTS OF LAXMI JAYANT.

5)SEEKING DOCUMENTS & FORM USED FOR ADMISSION IN VIDHYA BHAWAN SCHOOL.

6)SEEKING DETAILS & DOCUMENTS OF SCHOOLING FROM YEAR 1999 TO

2005.”

2. The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 11.11.2024 stating as under:

“As per RTI section -11 (1) third party information can not be provided.

Further, only generic information such as salary details can be given to spouse.”

3. Aggrieved by the decision of the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 15.11.2024. The FAA vide its order dated 06.12.2024, upheld reply of the CPIO.

4. Challenging the FAA’s order,Appellant is before the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.

Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:

The following were present:-

Appellant: Shri Vikas Singh, present in person.

Respondent: Dr. Ramdas Shivhare, US present in person.

5. Written statement filed by the Appellant as well as the CPIO is taken on record.

6. Hearing Bench, at the outset, pointed out that mark sheet, date of birth certificate and other related details as sought by the Appellant pertains to personal information of third party, whic