9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Consultation with Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) regarding disclosure of vigilance related files. 2. Consultation with third party, Ms. Jyoti Balasundaram, under Section 11(1) of the RTI Act. 3. Objection by Ms. Jyoti Balasundaram regarding potential misuse of information. 4. Decision on allowing inspection of specific files to the appellant, subject to RTI Act provisions. 5. Absence of provision in the RTI Act for imposing conditions on information usage. 6. Necessity of hearing for the appellant after allowing inspection of relevant files. Analysis: 1. The Central Information Commission (CIC) held a hearing regarding an RTI application filed by Shri R.K. Jain, directing consultation with the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) for disclosure of vigilance related files. CIC emphasized the importance of fully examining the implications before making a decision on disclosure. 2. Following CIC's direction, both the CVC and the concerned third party, Ms. Jyoti Balasundaram, were consulted. Ms. Balasundaram expressed concerns about potential harassment and defamation, leaving the decision to the authorities while requesting safeguards against malicious use of information. 3. The CVC conveyed no objection to disclose specific documents related to a complaint against Ms. Jyoti Balasundaram, leading to the allowance of inspection of certain files to the appellant, subject to RTI Act provisions and directions from CIC. 4. In response to Ms. Balasundaram's request for an undertaking against defamation, it was noted that the RTI Act does not provide for imposing such conditions. Any misuse of information by the appellant would necessitate legal action by Ms. Balasundaram. 5. Considering the approval for file inspection, the necessity of a hearing for the appellant was deemed unnecessary in light of the allowed access to relevant files. The appeal was consequently disposed of, concluding the matter based on the decisions reached through consultations and compliance with RTI Act provisions.
|
