@ Author
Your que. are wrongly addressed to our ld. brother Ali. I volunteer to clear all your doubts and suggest to calmly re-read suggestion hereto before asking next set of que. as they are self explanatory;
1. PIO = Public Information officer
2. The moment she says "no" and you get a copy of reply from PIO stating third party info. Cannot be given submit before concerned Court to call PIO with Register as your Witness and you will see clarity on TRUTH of her re-marriage and that is exactly what for you are firstly sending a RTI is it not so:-)
3. The PIO can't seek third party reply in your case and for the same I quote CIC Order which you may annex with your application;
Central Information Commission
Appeal No.CIC/WB/A/2008/01390-SM dated 23-04-2008
Right to Information Act-2005-Under Section (19)
Dated: 28 October 2009
Name of the Appellant
:Shri M.L.Jain
H – 102, Raj Nagar – II,
Palam Colony,
New Delhi – 110 045.
Name of the Public Authority
:CPIO, O/o the Deputy Commissioner of Police, South West District,
New Delhi.
The Appellant was present in person.
On behalf of the Respondent, the following were present:-
(i) Shri Zile Singh, ACP,
(ii) Shri Satya Parkash, Sub-Inspector
2. In this case, the Appellant had requested the CPIO on April 23, 2008 for a copy of the complaint dated March 3, 2008 made by one Shri K.K. Agarwal to the Union Finance Minister, Chief Minister of Delhi and the Commissioner of Delhi Police The CPIO declined to provide the copy of the said complaint in his reply dated May 28, 2008 claiming that this was third party information and, therefore, could not be disclosed. Against this, the Appellant approached the first Appellate Authority on June 10, 2008. The Appellate Authority disposed of the appeal in his order dated July 5, 2008 by upholding the decision of the CPIO. Consequently, the Appellant has come before us in second appeal.
3. Both the parties were present during the hearing and made their submissions. We do not agree with the CPIO that the complaint filed by any person cannot be disclosed merely because the Complainant does not want the complaint to be so disclosed. Once a complaint is filed with the Police or any other authorities, which the said Public Authority decides to enquire into, the complaint becomes a valid public document. It cannot be CIC/WB/A/2008/01390-SM
disclosed only if the contents of such complaint exempted from disclosure under any of the provisions of the Right to Information (RTI) Act. In this case, the Respondent has cited no such provision of the Right to Information (RTI) Act in denying the information except by stating that the complaint had been filed by a third party.
4. In view of the above, we direct the CPIO to provide to the Appellant a copy of the complaint of Shri K.K. Agarwal dated March 3, 2008 within 10 working days from the receipt of this order.
5. With the above directions, the appeal is disposed off.
6. Copies of this order be given free of cost to the parties.
(Satyananda Mishra)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against application and payment of the charges prescribed under the Act to the CPIO of this Commission.
(Vijay Bhalla)
Assistant Registrar
4. Why you are answering yourself on behalf of PIO by sayign the moment you ask PIO about marriage certificate she will say NO. ld. friend now-a-days a husband can get PF details of his wife and it is not priveldge info and for the same CIC decision is below;
Central Information Commission
2nd Floor, August Kranti Bhawan,
Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi – 110 066
Decision No.1816/IC(A)/2008
F. No.CIC/MA/A/2007/00583
Dated, the 10th January, 2008
Name of the Appellant: Sh. Ashish Kumar Tiwari
Name of the Public Authority: Employees’ Provident Fund Organisation
Facts:
1. The appellant was heard on 9/1/2008.
2. The appellant has asked for the details of PF account in respect of his ex-wife. The CPIO has, however, refused to furnish the information u/s 8(1)(e) and (j) of the Act.
3. During the hearing, the appellant stated that his ex-wife is already employed by a school and, therefore, there is no justification for payment of maintenance allowance as awarded by the Court. He, therefore, pleaded that the information asked for is required to seek exemption from payment of maintenance allowance.
Decision:
4. The appellant’s financial interest is affected in the matter, as he is seeking legal relief from the Court. The disclosure of financial details, mainly PF contributions by his ex-wife would surely help the affected parties in arriving at the reasonable amount of maintenance to be paid to his divorced wife. The disclosure of information sought is, therefore, in larger public interest. The information should therefore be provided.
5. The CPIO is, therefore, directed to furnish the details of PF of his ex-wife, after determining his identity as ex-husband of the person whose details have been asked for. This information should be furnished within 15 working days from the date of issue of this decision.
6. With these observations, the appeal is disposed of.
Sd/-
(Prof. M.M. Ansari) Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy:
(L.C. Singhi)
Additional Registrar
Name & address of Parties:
1. Sh. Ashish Kumar Tiwari, Qtr. No.H-3, Sadar Bazar, PWD Colony, Hoshangabad – 461 001.
2. Sh. M. Ramakrishnan, Regional Provident Fund Commissioner-II(FA)/CPIO, Employees’ Provident Fund Organisation, Regional Office, 7, Race Course Road, Indore (M.P.)
5. Further to above a husband can even get financial details of his wife and here is the decision which you may annex with your application in case still in doubt that you will not get asked info;
Decision No.1816/IC(A)/2008 – F. No.CIC/MA/A/2007/00583
Dated, the 10th January, 2008
Name of the Appellant: Sh. Ashish Kumar Tiwari
Name of the Public Authority: Employees’ Provident Fund Organisation
Facts:
1. The appellant was heard on 9/1/2008.
2. The appellant has asked for the details of PF account in respect of his ex-wife. The CPIO has, however, refused to furnish the information u/s 8(1)(e) and (j) of the Act.
3. During the hearing, the appellant stated that his ex-wife is already employed by a school and, therefore, there is no justification for payment of maintenance allowance as awarded by the Court. He, therefore, pleaded that the information asked for is required to seek exemption from payment of maintenance allowance.
Decision:
4. The appellant’s financial interest is affected in the matter, as he is seeking legal relief from the Court. The disclosure of financial details, mainly PF contributions by his ex-wife would surely help the affected parties in arriving at the reasonable amount of maintenance to be paid to his divorced wife. The disclosure of information sought is, therefore, in larger public interest. The information should therefore be provided.
5. The CPIO is, therefore, directed to furnish the details of PF of his ex-wife, after determining his identity as ex-husband of the person whose details have been asked for. This information should be furnished within 15 working days from the date of issue of this decision.
6. With these observations, the appeal is disposed of.
Sd/-
(Prof. M.M. Ansari) Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy:
(L.C. Singhi)
Additional Registrar
Name & address of Parties:
1. Sh. Ashish Kumar Tiwari, Qtr. No.H-3, Sadar Bazar, PWD Colony, Hoshangabad – 461 001.
2. Sh. M. Ramakrishnan, Regional Provident Fund Commissioner-II(FA)/CPIO, Employees’ Provident Fund Organisation, Regional Office, 7, Race Course Road, Indore (M.P.)
6. Yes as brief for seeking info. under RTI Act you shall mention such and such divorce case has been filed by my wife who has already been divorceed by such and such Court and yet hiding her re-marriage status she is seeking another divorce from an Indian Court and to the best of availabel information in public domain she got registered her marriage with one of your sub-offices between such and such range of date.
Hence to defend myself against her 'false / fraud' in Court of Law I am seeking following info;
a. Kindly provide me info. regarding all marriages registered from such and such date to such and such date from all your five sub -offices in Bangalore from such and such period to such and such period. Kindly priovide true copies of respective register entries.
b. Kindly provide me the attested copy of the application provided (front and back of Page of – RULE 5) for the registration of the marriage of Ms. XYZ with reference to marriage certificate.
c. Kindly provide true copy of the Marriage Certificate of Ms. XYZ and her reigstered husband whose marriage was registered in between such and such date ot such and such date.
7. When you get rejection letter on third party grounds from PIO then shoot below letter quoting PIO ref. no. / date
"I would like to request following INFORMATION (Information as defined in the Right to Information Act, 2005) as the information asked pertains to the concealment of re-marriage by my ex-wife in several Legal proceedings and is in great deal of Public Interest hence information asked.
1. kindly provide me certified copy of page of register containing and or showing diary dispatch number with date through which the third party submission was asked/called for?
2. Certified Copy of the letter dispatched to third party for making his / her submission?
3. Certified copy of page of register containing and/or showing Diary register number through which third party submission was received.
4. Certified copy of the submission document received from third party.
PLEASE NOTE:
1. In case of U Vardaraya Nayak Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore dt. 25/06/2007 CIC Digest (Vol II) 1580 (383)
Where it was Held: Objections filed by the Third Party should be made available to the Appellant. CPIO is not required to mechanically accept the third party's objection to disclosure of an information."
8. For address of Authority I quoted there is something called GOOGLE SEARCH mind if you do some search to save my time so that I can answer other queries!
Lastly all replies must come in 30 - 35 days and there is nothing called "prompt replies" from a PIO unless a FIR is lodged then under life and liberty clause the reply comes in 24-48 hrs. which even RTI CIC decisions says.
