Delhi High Court: In an appeal filed to challenge the judgment dated 22-09-2023, the Division Bench of Manmohan, ACJ., and Mini Pushkarna, J.*, opined that the disputes regarding the correctness of information provided under the RTI Act or any other dispute or controversy could not be adjudicated in the proceedings under the RTI Act. The Court opined that the CPIO was only required to supply all the information or documents within his access and whether or not such information as provided by the CPIO under the RTI Act was incorrect in any manner was not the domain of consideration or determination under the RTI proceedings and dismissed the present appeal.
Background
In an instant case, the appellant filed an application dated 19-07-2017 under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (‘RTI Act’) seeking his service record from National Book Trust. The appellant contended that the Central Public Information Officer (‘CPIO’), the respondent, knowingly provided incomplete information to the appellant under the RTI Act, vide letter dated 04-08-2017. Further, it was also submitted that the respondent had wrongly informed that the appellant was working in the National Book Trust since 15-12-2008, whereas he was working in the National Book Trust since 2001.
Subsequently, the appellant filed an appeal against the letter dated 04-08-2017, which was dismissed by the First Appellate Authority vide order dated 18-09-2017. Thereafter, the appellant filed an appeal before the Central Information Commissioner (‘CIC’) which was also dismissed vide order dated 24-10-2018, against which a writ petition was filed by the appellant. However, after the dismissal of the writ petition vide judgment dated 22-09-2023, the present appeal was filed by the appellant.
Analysis, Law, and Decision
The Court noted that the main dispute raised by the appellant was the wrong information provided to him by the CPIO in response to his RTI application. The Court noted that the Trial Court after considering the facts and circumstances the present case held that the proceedings under the RTI Act could not be converted into proceedings for adjudication of disputes regarding correctness of the information supplied.
Further, the Court upon perusal of the definition of information under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act opined that the information provided under the RTI Act included various records, documents, circular which could be accessed by the Public Authority under any other law for the time being in force. Thus, the CPIO’s responsibility was discharged under the RTI Act upon providing all such information and documents that might be accessible to him.
The Court relied on Khanapuram Gandaiah v. Administrative Officers, (2010) 2 SCC 1, wherein it was held that under the RTI Act, an applicant was entitled to get only such information which was already in existence and accessible to the public authority under the law. Therefore, the Court opined that it was clear that dispute regarding the correctness of information provided under the RTI Act or any other dispute or controversy could not be adjudicated in the proceedings under the RTI Act.
Thus, the Court opined that the CPIO was only required to supply all the information or documents within his access and whether or not such information as provided by the CPIO under the RTI Act was incorrect in any manner was not the domain of consideration or determination under the RTI proceedings and dismissed the present appeal.
[Narendra Tyagi v. CPIO, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 8043, decided on 06-12-2023]
*Judgment authored by- Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Mini Pushkarna
Advocates who appeared in this case :
For the Appellant: Nandini Sharma, Advocate;
