Inter-departmental notes not third party info: Central Information Commission to PMO

NEW DELHI: The inter-departmental notes do not come in the purview of third party information and should be disclosed as per the RTI Act, the CIC has conveyed to the PMO which had refused to disclose a DoPT opinion in the matter of whistle-blower IFoS officer Sanjiv Chaturvedi.

The PMO had claimed that the records related to Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) opinion and follow up action were a third party information of DoPT and cannot be given.

"The Commission finds that interdepartmental notes could not be totally treated as prohibited information. Inter departmental notes of public authority also will constitute information (under the RTI Act)," Information Commissioner Sridhar Acharyulu said.

"The PMO is expected to apply doctrine of severability, while disclosing information of interdepartmental notes to the appellant, i.e. avoiding information which cannot be disclosed," he said.

A 2010 government circular said that records of one department held by another should be considered as third party information in case it is a confidential information.

It had directed that before disclosure of such information, opinion of the department, to which records are related, must be taken.

Activist Subhash Agrawal had filed a RTI application following media reports alleging Chaturvedi was being harassed by the Haryana government and DoPT intervention reportedly resulted in thwarting a CBI inquiry into the scam.

The commission was hearing the plea of Agrawal who sought to know all the file notings related to controversial opinion furnished by DoPT to the PMO wherein the institution of an inquiry in the matter by the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) was said to be "ultra-vires of their (MoEF) powers and hence devoid of any force of law".

"As regards, the recommendation of the inquiry against serving officers of the state government, DoPT has clarified that the initiative has to be taken by the Government of Haryana, being the competent authority to act on officers working under their jurisdiction," DoPT had said.

Meanwhile, in his submissions to the CIC, Chaturvedi, who blew the lid off the forestry scam in Haryana, claimed that he must be allowed to intervene in the matter as it is vital for his career.

The Commission has now issued notice to the PMO and DoPT why Chaturvedi should not be allowed to intervene in the matter.

"He (Chaturvedi) alleged that such opinion is generated by some seniors to counter two-member committee report which recommended action against officers and ministers of Haryana in the forestry scam, complained by him," Acharyulu said.

The disclosure of file notings will give what action was taken by the PMO on the DoPT opinion which was found to be against the norms.