Central Information Commission: In a second appeal filed by the appellant under Section 19 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 on the ground of arbitrary denial of information by the Chief Public Information Officer (CPIO), the Chief Information Officer has held the information sought by the appellant was rightly denied by the CPIO as it pertains to the third party who expressed their dissent from divulging the same to any other third party.
The appellant has sought a copy of the application and complete set of documents submitted by Snehkul Public School, Namkun, Ranchi and Sarla Birla Public School, Namkun Ranchi at the time of NOIS OBE accreditation. The Commission noted that after being dissatisfied with the arbitrary denial of information from the respondent, the appellant filed for a second appeal. The appellant sought the Commission to direct the respondent to provide for complete information.
The Commission observed that the CPIO, National Institute of Open Schooling (‘NIOS’) denied disclosure of information stating that the named institutions affiliated to NIOS are third parties and refused to consent to the disclosure. Therefore, the Research Centre, Ranchi could not provide the desired documents. Further, the appellant runs study centers in the same region; therefore, furnishing information pertaining to other study centers would hamper competitive positions.
The Commission observed that the information sought by the appellant was rightly denied by the CPIO, thus, it found noscope of intervention in the case and therefore, the appeal was disposed of.
[Prakash Sahu v. National Institute of Open Schooling, Second Appeal No. CIC/NIOPS/A/2021/647045 decided on 27-10-2022]
