whispers in the corridors
Service details of husband
The Appellant sought information pertaining to service details of her husband, in terms of pay slip, last pay certificate etc. The information was denied under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. The Appellant stated that she is not satisfied with the reply of the CPIO, as she continues to be the wife of the individual regarding whom information has been sought. She further stated that on sl. No. 4 of the document sought in the instant RTI Application “nomination for PRIC benefit AFGIS – 224” she has not affixed her finger print and the individual has got the finger print of some unknown person affixed on the same which amounts to fraud. The CIC directed the PIO to process the RTI Application as per the provision of Section 11 of RTI Act.
In the case of Vijay Prakash vs. Union of India (W.P. (C) 803/2009) dated 01.07.2009, it was held that in private disputes such as the present one between a husband and wife the basic protection afforded by virtue of the exemption from disclosure enacted under Section 8(1)(j) cannot be lifted. Further, the gross pay of an officer is liable to be disclosed under section 4(1)(b)(x) suo-motu under the RTI Act.
Dr. Anuradha Verma (dranuradhaverma@yahoo.co.in) is an expert on RTI matters and has co-authored the books RIGHT TO INFORMATION - LAW AND PRACTICE and PIO’s guide to RTI. Apart from her weekly article here, her other articles can be read at the website of RTI Foundation of India at the link: www.rtifoundationofindia.com