Personal Information Having No Relation To Any Public Activity Or Interest Cannot Be Disclosed Under RTI: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court today observed that disclosure of personal information which had no relation to any public activity or interest and revelation of which could cause “unwarranted invasion” into the privacy of an individual could not be disclosed under the RTI Act. 

Bench of Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh said, 

“Right to get information is subject to certain provisions of the RTI Act. “Section 8 (of RTI Act) has categorically mentioned that personal information cannot be supplied … which has no relation to any public activity.”

The bench in the present matter was hearing an appeal against the order of dismissal passed by Justice Prathiba M Singh in a writ petition wherein the petitioner had originally challenged the impugned order dated July 17, 2020 passed by the Central Information Commission against the response of the  Presidential Secretariat dated 24th August 2018, to his RTI application seeking information in respect of certain appointments made for Multi Tasking Staff at the Presidential Estate, Rashtrapati Bhawan.

The single Bench took note of the fact that the petition was quite about the fact that the petitioner’s daughter had applied for being considered for appointment for the post of Multi Tasking Staff at the Rashtrapati Bhawan and petitioner seeking the requisite information especially after his daughter did not obtain employment clearly pointed out to some ulterior motives.

“Even otherwise, on merits, the information sought in respect of the names of the fathers and residential addresses of the candidates is completely invasive, and would be a roving and fishing enquiry. The said information which is sought is clearly protected under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act which provides that any such information shall not be provided which constitutes personal information and is invasive of the privacy of individuals,” Court said.

While dismissing the petition, the Court observed that whenever information was sought under the RTI Act, disclosure of an interest in the information sought would be necessary to establish the bonafides of the applicant. 

The Court also held that non-disclosure of the same could result in injustice to several other affected persons, whose information is sought. 

For the petitioner’s act of concealing the material facts including that his daughter had also applied for appointment to the post of the Multi Tasking Staff, the Court had imposed a cost of Rs 25,000 to be paid to the “High Court of Delhi (Middle Income Group) legal Aid Society”. 

The division bench while dismissing the appeal said that it was in “full agreement” with the reasons given by the single judge.

Case Title: Har Kishan V. President Secretariat Through Its Secretary & Anr| LPA 90/2021