2018 (9) TMI 1296 - Board - Insolvency and Bankruptcy

RTI Application - information from the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India relating to the examination for the recruitment of the officer s grade- A, year 2018 (i) marks obtained by me and (ii) Cut-off marks of the written test. - Held that - RTI appeal has been examined and have perused the response provided by the respondent in respect of the queries raised in the RTI application. In this context, as find that information in respect of the specific query in para 2 in point (i) and (ii) above has been put in the public domain on the website of the Board, i.e., www.ibbi.gov.in accessible to all. Once the information is available in the public domain, it cannot be said to be held or under the control of the public authority and thus ceases to be an information accessible under the RTI Act, as held by the Hon ble CIC in matter Shri K. Lall Vs. Shri M.K. Bagri (Order dated April 12, 2007) wherein it held once an information is voluntarily disseminated it is excluded from the purview of the RTI Act and, to that extant, contributes to minimizing the resort to the use of this Act .

Summary

Issues:
- Appeal against CPIO order regarding RTI request for recruitment examination information.

Analysis:
The judgment involves an appeal against an order of the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) regarding a Right to Information (RTI) request made by the appellant, seeking information related to the recruitment examination for the officer's grade-A in the year 2018. The appellant specifically requested information on the marks obtained by them and the cut-off marks of the written test. Upon examination, it was found that the information sought by the appellant had already been made available in the public domain on the IBBI website, www.ibbi.gov.in. The First Appellate Authority (FAA) noted that once information is in the public domain, it cannot be considered as being 'held' or 'under the control of' the public authority, and therefore, it ceases to be accessible under the RTI Act. The FAA referenced a previous case to support this conclusion, highlighting that voluntarily disseminated information is excluded from the purview of the RTI Act, which aims to minimize the reliance on the Act. Consequently, the appeal was disposed of in light of the information's availability in the public domain, rendering it beyond the scope of the RTI Act.