YOGENDRA CHANDRAKER Vs. STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this petition is to the order dated 7-3-2008 (Annexure P-7) passed by the State Information Commission, Raipur, in appeal filed by the petitioner against the order dated 31-10-2007 (Annexure P-5) passed by the State Public Information Appellate Authority.

(2.) The facts, in nutshell, as projected by the petitioner are that the petitioner made an application on 13-7-2007 (Annexure P-l) to the Inspector General of Police, Police Headquarter, Raipur, seeking for answer-sheets of Constables who appeared in the Departmental Promotion Examination (Written) held on 29-4-2007. The same was referred to the Superintendent of Police, Mahasamund. The Superintendent of Police, by order dated 24-7-2007 declined to supply the information to the petitioner on the ground of exemption contained under the provisions of Section 8 (1) (d) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (in short "the Act, 2005"). Being aggrieved, the petitioner preferred a first appeal to the Inspector General of Police, Raipur Region, Raipur. The first appeal was also dismissed on the same ground holding that the answer sheets of other candidates are confidential and the same are exempted from disclosure under the provisions of Section 8 (1) (d) of the Act, 2005. Thus, the order passed by the Superintendent of Police, Mahasamund was upheld and appeal was rejected. Thereagainst, the petitioner preferred second appeal before the respondent No. 1, the respondent No. 1, having agreed with the conclusions and order passed by the Superintendent of Police, Mahasamund and the order in appeal passed by the Inspector General of Police, dismissed the second appeal, thus this petition.

(3.) Shri Kotecha, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the information sought for by the petitioner has not been granted to him on the ground that under the provisions of Section 8 (1) (d) of the Act, 2005, the documents as required by him, cannot be granted. However, there is no such bar in providing certified copy of the answer sheets. The aforesaid provision is not at all attracted in this case. The respondents ought to have sought consent of the Constables, i.e., third party for disclosing the information of their answer sheets.