Chennai: Tamil Nadu Information Commission has rejected an RTI appeal seeking information under 90 heads, holding that the request had no public interest element and that providing such voluminous information could affect the day-to-day functioning of a government office.
The Commission said such a request, in the circumstances, attracted Section 7(9) of the Right to Information Act, as it could affect the resources of the public authority required for its routine functioning. The case concerned an RTI application filed by Mohan S Thamizhkumaran seeking information under 90 heads about V Rameshkumar, who was serving as a block educational officer in Palani union of Dindigul district. The application was initially transferred between various authorities under Section 6(3) of the RTI Act. The public information officer (PIO) subsequently furnished information through a letter dated Jan 3, 2024. The appellant, dissatisfied with the response, filed a first appeal and later approached the Commission with a second appeal under Section 19(3).
You Can Also Check: Gold Rate in Chennai | Silver Rate in Chennai | Bank Holidays in Chennai | Public Holidays in Chennai | Chennai AQI | Weather in Chennai | Petrol Price in Chennai | Diesel Price in Chennai | CNG Price in Chennai | LPG Price in Chennai Stay updated with the latest Chennai news.
State information commissioner V P R Ilamparithi said the information sought related to a third party and that the appellant had sought excessive details concerning an official from the School Education Department. The information included details of the union to which Rameshkumar was first appointed as a block educational officer and disciplinary action, if any, taken against him. After examining the application and response, the Commission found that the appellant had sought an excessive amount of information, all of which related to a third party. It also recorded that sufficient information had already been furnished by the PIO. The Commission accordingly disposed of the second appeal and advised the appellant to seek only information required by him, specify his requests clearly and pursue them with a public-interest objective without causing hindrance to the day-to-day functioning of the public authority and the Commission. Download the TOI App.
The officer also told the Commission that the appellant had sought an excessive amount of information, which could affect routine office work, and that there was no public interest involved in the request. During the hearing last week, the PIO submitted that the information sought had already been furnished through registered post. The officer further submitted that the information was being sought for reasons of personal animosity or other unnecessary purposes.