A public authority can only withhold information of nature specified in Section 8 of the RTI Act

Last updated: 10 February 2021

Save Share

Quick Summary

The Delhi High Court has ruled that public authorities can only withhold information if it falls under the specific exemptions outlined in Section 8 of the Right to Information (RTI) Act. This judgement clarifies that non-disclosure must be justified under these provisions. The case involved an individual seeking information that was allegedly not provided correctly, with the authority claiming exemption under Section 8(1)(h) of the Act.

Court :
Delhi High Court

Brief :
This writ petition is filed seeking a writ, order or direction to impugn the order dated 15.01.2018 passed by the Central Information Commission (CIC).

Citation :
Appeal Number : W.P.(C) 3701/2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Pronounced on: 05.02.2021
W.P.(C) 3701/2018
AMIT KUMAR SHRIVASTAVA ...... Petitioner
Through Petitioner-in-person.
Versus
CENTRAL INFORMATION
COMMISSION, NEW DELHI ..... Respondent.
Through Mr.Amit Bansal, Sr. Standing counsel
with Ms. Manisha Singh, Adv.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH
JAYANT NATH, J.

1. This writ petition is filed seeking a writ, order or direction to impugn the order dated 15.01.2018 passed by the Central Information Commission (CIC).

2. The case of the petitioner is that he filed an RTI Application on 05.09.2016 under Rule 6 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the RTI Act’) seeking disclosure of point wise information which was mentioned at serial No. 5(i) to 5(xxv) of the said application. It is claimed that the CPIO did not provide correct information in respect of point 5(i) of the RTI application. The CPIO hid the cases registered under IPC/PC Act. It is also claimed that the CPIO misled regarding the other issues. Information was not disclosed under Section 8(1) (h) of the RTI Act.

3. The petitioner filed a first appeal on 10.10.2016 before the First Appellate Authority. It is stated that the Appellate Authority did not decide the appeal of the petitioner in the defined period. The petitioner filed a second appeal before the Second Appellate Authority CIC. It is the grievance of the petitioner that during the hearing, the respondent believed the verbal submissions of the CPIO instead of the written submissions of the petitioner and allowed them to sustain their stand for non-disclosure of the information in respect of all the points by claiming exemption under Section 8(1) (h) of the RTI Act. Hence, the present writ petition.

To know more in details find the attachment file

FAQ :

A public authority can only withhold information if it is of a nature specified in Section 8 of the RTI Act, 2005.

Section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act pertains to information that would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders.

No, an authority must justify the withholding of information by citing the specific exemptions under Section 8 of the RTI Act.

If an appeal is not decided within the defined period, the applicant may have grounds to pursue further appeals, such as a second appeal to the Central Information Commission (CIC).

The petitioner claimed that the CPIO did not provide correct information and misled regarding other issues, alleging information was wrongly withheld under Section 8(1)(h).