9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (3) TMI 616X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d 29-8-2007. Appellant had filed his RTI-request dated 18-5-2007 before the CPIO. Shri B. Thamar, Addl. Director General (Vigilance), Department of Customs and Central Excise, Kolkata. The appellant received the CPIO s decision on 12-6-2007, which he (appellant) took in first-appeal to the Appellate Authority and thereafter came to the Commission in second-appeal. 2. The main RTI-request of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s (Pvt) Limited, against whom the appellant had apparently taken up an enquiry. The appellant had cited an advice from the UPSC on file No. 3/89/2005-S.F., dated 7-11-2005 as well as an order of the Ministry of Finance dated 18-11-2005 that the appellant rather than being punished on the complaint of Shri S.K. Ruia, actually deserved commendation. However, the Appellate Authority refrained from ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (g) of RTI Act. Respondents have further urged in their written submission before the Commission that the assumption of the appellant that the vigilance enquiry against him was started on the basis of information provided by Shri S. K. Ruia was not correct. The vigilance enquiry was commenced on account of several pieces of information, which the department had in its possession. It was possible t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... understandably, to be disclosed. The anxiety of the respondents can be taken care of by suitably deleting /hiding or blocking that part of the information which might relate to the sources of information provided to the public authority for the purposes of law enforcement and thus would attract Section 8(1)(g) of RTI Act. It won t be proper to withhold the entire file from disclosure simply becaus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
