Uttarakhand Information Commission Mandates Disclosure in Forest Department RTI Case
In a significant ruling, the State Information Commission (SIC) of Uttarakhand has issued a directive to the public information officer (PIO) of the state's forest department. The commission has ordered the PIO to furnish the petitioner with all requested information under the Right to Information (RTI) Act within a strict timeframe of 15 days. This directive is contingent upon the completion of an ongoing investigation against Indian Forest Service (IFS) officer Vinay Kumar Bhargav, highlighting the commission's commitment to transparency while respecting procedural integrity.
Petitioner Seeks Comprehensive Documentation on Alleged Corruption
The petitioner, Harinder Dhingra, a resident of Gurugram in Haryana, filed an RTI application seeking a complete and exhaustive set of material documents. These documents pertain to all actions taken against IFS officer Vinay Kumar Bhargav in connection with alleged corruption incidents. The allegations specifically involve the construction of eco-huts and other eco-tourism facilities in Munsiyari, located in the Pithoragarh district of Uttarakhand.
The scope of the request was extensive, encompassing:
- All relevant files, file notings, official letters, and detailed reports.
- Account statements, tender documents, quotations, and comprehensive expenditure details.
- Notings from all levels of the Uttarakhand government, along with records indicating the duration each file remained with individual officers.
Additionally, Dhingra sought all material documents related to actions taken for alleged violations of sections 2 and 3 of the Forest Conservation Act. These violations concern the construction of permanent cement, brick, and mortar structures at the eco-huts and other facilities in Munsiyari, raising environmental and regulatory concerns.
Commission Cites Supreme Court Precedent on Personal Information
While adjudicating the matter, the State Information Commission carefully considered the legal framework, particularly referencing the Supreme Court's landmark decision in the case of Girish Ram Chandra Deshpande vs Central Information Commission. This precedent established that copies of memos, show-cause notices, censure orders, and punishment orders qualify as "personal information" under section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act.
The commission noted that the disclosure of such personal information is generally exempt from public scrutiny, unless there is a demonstrable and overriding public interest that justifies its release. This balancing act between individual privacy and public accountability is central to the commission's deliberations in this case.
SIC Issues Specific Directives for Timely Information Provision
In its final order, the SIC provided clear and actionable instructions to the concerned public information officer. The commission directed the PIO to furnish the complete outcome of the investigation on the two primary points raised by the petitioner within 15 days of the investigation's conclusion. This applies specifically if the investigation into the alleged corruption and Forest Conservation Act violations is still ongoing at the time of the order.
This directive ensures that once the investigative process is finalized, the petitioner will receive timely and comprehensive information, thereby upholding the principles of the RTI Act while allowing due process to take its course. The ruling underscores the SIC's role in facilitating access to information that is crucial for public oversight and governance accountability in Uttarakhand.
