के (cid:3)ीय सूचना आयोग Central Information Commission बाबा गंगनाथ माग(cid:18), मुिनरका

Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka नई िद(cid:24)ी, New Delhi – 110067 File No: CIC/CCITL/A/2024/107867 Prabhu Nath Ram .….अपीलकता(cid:18)/Appellant VERSUS बनाम CPIO, Office of the Principal Commissioner CGST & Central Excise, Block-B, 3rd Floor, Apratyakshakar Bhawan, Vibhuti Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow – 226010 ….(cid:29)ितवादीगण /Respondent Date of Hearing : 05.08.2025 Date of Decision : 28.08.2025 INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari Relevant facts emerging from appeal:

RTI application filed on : 06.12.2023 CPIO replied on : 03.01.2024 First appeal filed on : 05.01.2024 First Appellate Authority’s order : 02.02.2024 2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 11.03.2024 Information sought:

1. The Appellant filed an (online) RTI application dated 06.12.2023 seeking the following information:

“Refer to letter dated 27.01.2006 of P.N. Ram, Supdt. now retired, addressed to the then Asstt. Commissioner, Central Excise Farrukhabad, forwarded by him to the Commissioner, Central Excise Lucknow causing issue of Order C.No.II(39)Vig/06/LKO/05/14, dated 02/02/2006, by the Commissioner, Central Excise Lucknow, copies enclosed for ready reference.

In the above context Kindly provide urgently attested copy of note sheet put up by initiating officer, supervisory heads and final order recorded by Commissioner before singing of order above.”

2. The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 03.01.2024 stating as under:

“It is informed that the information sought by you is related to third party which is exempted under section 8(1)(j) of RTI Act 2005.”

3. Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 05.01.2024.

The FAA vide its order dated 02.02.2024, upheld the reply of CPIO.

4. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.

Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:

The following were present:-

Appellant: Absent Respondent: Absent

5. Proof of having served a copy of Second Appeal on Respondent while filing the same in CIC on 11.03.2024 is available on record.

6. Shri Rakesh Srivastav, CPIO, Dy. Commissioner case has filed a detailed written submissions dated 28.07.2025 disclosing complete facts of the case and requested the Commission to place the same on record, copy of the same was sent to the Appellant. The relevant paras of the written submission are reproduced as under:

“1. RTI was received in CGST & CX. Commissionerate, Lucknow, being Nodal Officer, on 06.12.2023. In the RTI application the applicant requested to provide the attested copy of note sheet put up by initiating officer, supervisory heads and final order recorded by Commissioner. before singing of Order C.No.11(39)vig/06/LKO/05/14. dated 02/02/2006.

2. In response to the above RTI application, the CPIO/ Assistant Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise Commissionerate, Lucknow has issued reply on 03.01.2024 to applicant. In the letter, the CPIO has given the reply which is hereunder: -

"it is informed that the information sought by you is related to third party which is exempted under section 8(1) (J) of the RTI Act, 2005".

3. Further the applicant has filed the First Appeal before the First Appellate Authority on 05.01.2024. In response the Appellate Authority issued Order in Appeal No. 88/2023-24 dated 02.02.2024 where-in Appellate Authority upheld that the order passed by the respective CPIO/ Assistant Commissioner is correct and henceforth dismissed the appeal.

4. Further Complaint of the applicant before the Hon'ble CIC under section

18 is not maintainable because of the following reasons: -

(a) Under the RTI Act, citizens can request and receive copies of note sheets from public authorities. These note sheets, which document the decision- making process, are generally considered public records and can be disclosed unless specifically exempted under Section 8 of the RTI Act.

(b) Section 8 of the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005, specifies exemption