CIC dismisses RTI seeking expenditure on LG, his family’s visit to Raj Bhawan

Says appellant seeking personal information of third parties, no further action required

SRINAGAR: In a recent decision, the Central Information Commission (CIC) dismissed seeking details about expenses incurred from the public exchequer on the visits of Lt. Governor Manoj Sinha and his associates to Raj Bhawan in Jammu and Kashmir.
The appeal, which followed an RTI application and subsequent dissatisfaction with the responses received, was ultimately found to have been appropriately addressed under the RTI Act of 2005.
The Central Information Commission (CIC), in a decision dated June 28, 2024, addressed Nitin Bakshi's second appeal concerning the expenditures on visits by Lt. Governor Manoj Sinha, his family, and friends to Raj Bhawan in Jammu and Kashmir. This appeal followed an RTI application filed on December 13, 2022 and a subsequent first appeal due to dissatisfaction with the initial responses.
Nitin Bakshi's RTI application sought comprehensive details on various expenditures and actions taken on applications and communications involving Lt. Governor Manoj Sinha. The requests included information on the expenses from the public exchequer for visits by the Lt. Governor and his associates, actions on applications sent by the appellant, and responses to tweets and emails.
The Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) of the Lieutenant Governor's Secretariat in Srinagar responded on January 16, 2023, denying information on expenses under Sections 8(1)(a) and 8(1)(g) of the RTI Act, which pertain to exemption from disclosure. Other information requested was either forwarded to relevant authorities or stated as not part of the records.
Unsatisfied with this response, Shri Bakshi filed a first appeal on January 31, 2023. The First Appellate Authority (FAA) upheld the CPIO's response, advising the appellant to file a fresh RTI application for certain points with the appropriate authority.
The appellant then escalated the matter to the CIC. During the hearing, Shri Bakshi contended that the reply on expenses was unsatisfactory. The respondent, Shri Kanwaljeet Singh Bali, clarified that the information sought was exempted under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, which protects personal information unless a larger public interest is demonstrated.
The CIC, led by Chief Information Commissioner Heeralal Samariya, concluded that the CPIO and FAA had provided appropriate responses in accordance with the RTI Act. The Commission determined that no further intervention was necessary, thereby disposing of the appeal.