Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(CIC) 7340
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Sanjeev Kumar Jindal, Information Commissioner
Nisar Khan – Appellant
Versus
CPIO – Respondent
CIC/DCDKS/A/2024/137907
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Nisar Khan
For the Respondents: Not Present
The denial of information under the RTI Act must be substantiated with specific reasoning and cannot be mechanical; a public authority must provide relevant information unless it is clearly covered by specific statutory exemptions, even in cases involving personal service disputes.
Headnote:(A) Right to Information Act, 2005 - Section 6(1) and 8(1)(b)(c) - Denial of information - Petitioner sought action taken reports and file notings regarding his service-related applications - CPIO furnished an irrelevant document - First Appellate Authority denied information citing exemption under Section 8(1)(b)(c) without application of mind - Commission held that denying information mechanically without examining the applicability of exemptions is improper - Directive issued to provide a revised point-wise reply.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. summary of rti application, departmental responses, administrative denials, and the context of the service dispute. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 2. requirement for reasoned denial of information and obligation to provide point-wise replies under the rti act. (Para 9) |
Relevant facts emerging from Second Appeal:
RTI application filed on : 18.09.2024
CPIO replied on : 24.10.2024
First appeal filed on : 21.10.2024
First Appellate Authority’s order : 14.12.2024
Second Appeal dated : 16.12.2024
Information sought:
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application on 18.09.2024 seeking the following information:
“आवेदक के द्वारा समय-समय पर विभिन्न आवेदन सेवा परलाभ भुगतान बाबत श्रीमान जी को भेजे गये है जिसे सूची संलग्न है। श्रीमान जी से निवेदन है कि संलग्न सूची मे दर्शाये गये पत्रों पर की गई कार्यवाही, मय नाजिम साहब के द्वारा दिये गये आदेश/निर्देशों सहित समस्त कार्यालय टिप्पणियों की प्रतियां की प्रमाणित प्रतिलिपियां सूचना का अधिकार अधिनियम 2005 धारा 6 (1) के अन्तर्गत उपलब्ध करवाये जाने की कृपा करावें।”
| क्र. सं. | पत्र संख्या | दिनांक |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1068 | 6-10-2021 |
| 2 | 1463 | 13-11-2021 |
| 3 | 2112 | 24-1-2022 |
| 4 | 1153 | 12-8-2022 |
| 5 | 1742 | 03-10-2022 |
| 6 | 1848 | 10-10-2022 |
| 7 | 1851 | 10-10-2022 |
| 8 | 233 | 27-2-2022 |
| 9 | 865 | 15-7-2022 |
| 10 | 1929 | 19-10-2022 |
| 11 | 1930 | 19-10-2022 |
| 12 | 2021 | 31-10-2022 |
| 13 | 2111 | 10-11-2022 |
| 14 | 2386 | 09-12-2022 |
| 15 | 2623 | 07-01-2023 |
| 16 | 3165 | 06-02-2024 |
| 17 | 968 | 29-7-2023 |
| 18 |
2. The CPIO furnished a reply to the appellant on 24.10.2024 stating as under:
“विषय: सूचना का अधिकार अधिनियम बाबत्।
संदर्भ: सूचना का अधिकार अधिनियम के अन्तर्गत पत्र क्र 2133 दिनांक 18.09.2024 इस कार्यालय मे प्राप्त दिनांक 19.09.2024 बाबत्।
उपरोक्त विषयागत संदर्भित आवेदन के क्रम मे कार्यालय से उपलब्ध संबंधित विभाग से प्राप्त वांछित दस्तावेज की प्रति निःशुल्क उपलब्ध है। (1 प्रति संलग्न)”
Letter No. AJ-8/47/2024-ALC dt 18.10.2024 stats as under:
“Nazim and Chief Executive Officer of Dargah Committee, Dargah Committee, Ajmer Representative Shri Shadab Ahmed, Asstt. Nazim is present.
All the parties are present. The above applicant Union has raised a dispute of Shri Nisar Khan Kayamkhyani working as Additional Security Officer at Daragah Khawaja Sahab, Ajmer for Non-payment of Salary for the month of October 2022 and wrongly wage fixation in UDC grade instead of the post of additional Security officer with effect form date of joining and supporting documents have been submitted by the applicant and a copy of same has also received by the representative of management. The management has submitted that the Conciliation Officer has to decide to make the unpaid amount of Salary for the month of October 2022 to Shri Nisar Khan Kayamkhani. During the joint discussion it has observed that Shri Wisar Khan Kayamkhani was performed his duty at Dargah Khawaja Sahab, Ajmer and remained present in continuous shift of previous month in the month of October 2022 and no written direction/order has been issued about the shifting of duties by the Competant Authority of management and it has also confirmed that aggrieved person was perfomed duty in the month of October 2022 in different shift.
The Conciliation Officer has observed that the above aggrieved person has perfomed his duty hence he is entitled to receive the unpaid salary for the month of October 2022. Hence management is requested to release the unpaid salary for the month of October 2022 within one month and submit the acknowledgement of receipt before the Conciliation Officer on next date of hearing.
On the request of all the parties the matter is adjourned and next date is fixed for joint discussion on 20.11.2024 at 16.30 am.”
3. Being dissatisfied, the Appellant filed a First Appeal on 21.10.2024. The FAA vide its order on 14.12.2024 stating as under:
“सूचना का ब्योरा:
1) चाही गई सूचना का विवरण आवेदक के द्वारा समय-समय पर विभिन्न आवेदन सेवा परलाभ भुगतान बाबत श्रीमान जी को भेजे गये है जिसे सूची संलग्न है। श्रीमान जी से निवेदन है कि संलग्न सूची मे दर्शाये गये पत्रों पर की गई कार्यवाही, मय नाजिम
