Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Ranjeet Kumar Bafana vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:9354) on 17 February, 2025

Author: Nupur Bhati

Bench: Nupur Bhati

[2025:RJ-JD:9354]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                 S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17433/2023

Ranjeet Kumar Bafana S/o Shri Kewal Chand Bafana, Aged About
55 Years, R/o Kansaron Ka Bas, Balotara (Rajasthan).
                                                                        ----Petitioner
                                        Versus
1.       State      Of     Rajasthan,          Secretary/principal         Secretary,
         Department Of Law And Legal Affairs, Government Of
         Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2.       State Public Information Officer Cum Dy. Registrar,
         Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur.
3.       Registrar General Cum Appellate Authorigy, Rajasthan
         High Court, Jodhpur.
4.       Rajasthan State Information Commissioner, Jawahar Lal
         Nehru      Marg,         Jaipur       Through          Chief    Information
         Commissioner.
                                                                     ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)             :     Mr. Shambhoo Singh Rathore



               HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI

Order

17/02/2025

1. The instant writ petition under Article 226, Constitution of

India has been filed with the following prayer:

"It is, therefore, most humbly prayed that this writ petition may kindly be allowed with cost and by an appropriate writ, order or direction:-

(A) By an appropriate writ, order or direction the impugned letter dated 01.08.2022 (Ann.7), impugned order dated 21.09.2022 (Ann.9) and the imagined judgment 31.08.2023 (Ann.14) may kindly be quashed and set aside.

(B) By an appropriate writ order or direction, the respondent no.2 may kindly be directed to provide the information sought by the petitioner vide his application dated 12.07.2022 under the provisions of RTI Act. (C) Any other appropriate writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem just and proper in the facts and

[2025:RJ-JD:9354] (2 of 7) [CW-17433/2023]

circumstances of the case may also kindly be granted in favour of petitioner."

2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the petitioner

filed an application dated 12.07.2022 (Annex.5) under the Right

to Information Act, 2005 ('RTI Act') seeking information regarding

all the proceedings undertaken in pursuance to the complaint

dated 12.12.2019 (Annex.1) filed by the petitioner against the

concerned judicial officer. However, the application (Annex.5) was

dismissed by the State Public Information Officer, Rajasthan High

Court, Jodhpur vide letter dated 01.08.2022 (Annex.7) on the

ground that the information sought by the petitioner is confidential

in nature under Rule 882, Rajasthan High Court Rules, 1952 and

also exempted from disclosure under Section 8(1)(j), RTI Act as

well as Rule 10 of Rajasthan RTI (High Court & Subordinate

Courts) Rules, 2006. Subsequently, the petitioner preferred appeal

before Appellate Authority against the rejection of Application

(Annex.5), which also came to be dismissed vide order dated

21.09.2022 (Annex.10). Similarly, the second appeal preferred

before the State Information Commissioner, Jaipur ('SIC') against

such rejection also came to be dismissed vide order dated

31.08.2023 (Annex.14). Aggrieved by the same the instant writ

petition has been filed by the petitioner.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

respective authorities have erred in rejecting the application

(Annex.5) as the it is the legal right of the petitioner to seek such

information regarding the proceedings undertaken in pursuance to

the complaint (Annex.1) filed by the petitioner against the

concerned judicial officer. He also submits that such information is

[2025:RJ-JD:9354] (3 of 7) [CW-17433/2023]

not personal information of the concerned judicial officer and

hence ought to have been disclosed.

4. Heard and perused the material available on record.

5. In the present case the petitioner filed the complaint

(Annex.1) against the concerned judicial officer aggrieved by the

rejection of an application filed by him under Section 114 of the

Code of Civil Procedure. Thereafter, the petitioner filed the

application dated 04.08.2021 (Annex.2) under RTI Act seeking the

status of his complaint which was provided to the petitioner vide

communication dated 19.08.2021 (Annex.4), wherein it was

disclosed that the complaint is under process. Subsequently, vide

application (Annex.5) the petitioner sought the disclosure of entire

record of proceedings taken in pursuance of the complaint

(Annex.1) filed by him against the concerned judicial officer.

However, the concerned authorities denied disclosure on the

grounds that the information sought by the petitioner is

confidential in nature under Rule 882, Rajasthan High Court Rules,

1952 and also exempted from disclosure under Section 8(1)(j),

RTI Act as well as Rule 10 of Rajasthan RTI (High Court &

Subordinate Courts) Rules, 2006.

6. This court finds that Section 8 of the RTI Act provides

exemption from disclosure of information in certain cases given

under sub-section (1). Further, Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act

provides exemption from disclosure of personal information the

disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or

interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy

of the individual unless the State/Central Public Information

Officer or appellate authority is of the view that such disclosure

[2025:RJ-JD:9354] (4 of 7) [CW-17433/2023]

serves the larger public interest. Further Section 8(2) of the RTI

Act puts a rider on Section 8(1), RTI Act that a public authority

may allow access to information if public interest in disclosure

outweighs the harm to protected interests. Section 8(1)(j) and

8(2), RTI Act read as under:

"8. Exemption from disclosure of information.--(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen,--

(j) information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information:

Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person.

(2) Notwithstanding anything in the Official Secrets Act, 1923 (19 of 1923) nor any of the exemptions permissible in accordance with sub-section (1), a public authority may allow access to information, if public interest in disclosure outweighs the harm to the protected interests."

7. Similarly, Rule 10 of Rajasthan RTI (High Court &

Subordinate Courts) Rules, 2006 restricts the disclosure of

information in certain cases. The relevant provision for the present

case are Rule 10 (1)(iii) and Rule 10(1)(vi) which are reproduced

as under:

"10.Restrictions.-(1) No information shall be provided to any applicant in the following matters :

(iii) The information, which has no relationship with the public activity.

(vi) If a copy can be issued under the provisions of Rajasthan High Court Rules, 1952, General Rules (Civil), 1986 or General Rules (Criminal), 1980."

[2025:RJ-JD:9354] (5 of 7) [CW-17433/2023]

Thus, as per the above rule no information can be provided to an

applicant if the information has no relationship with the public

activity or if a copy can be issued under the provisions of

Rajasthan High Court Rules, 1952, General Rules (Civil), 1986 or

General Rules (Criminal).

8. Further, Rule 882 of Rajasthan High Court Rules, 1952,

General Rules (Civil), 1986 provides that no copy or extract from

any minute, letter or document on any administrative or

confidential file of the court shall be issued except under an order

in writing of the Chief Justice countersigned by the registrar. The

said rule is reproduced as under:

"882. Confidential papers.- (1) No copy of, or extract from, any minute, letter or document on any administrative or confidential file of the Court shall be issued except under an order in writing of the Chief Justice countersigned by the Registrar. Every such Order shall be kept in a file by the Registrar and he shall make a note thereof duly dated and signed by him on such minute, letter or document."

Thus, Rule 882 of the Rajasthan High Court Rules, 1952, General

Rules (Civil), 1986 read with Rule 10 (1)(vi) of Rajasthan RTI

(High Court & Subordinate Courts) Rules, 2006 restricts the

disclosure of information which is on administrative or confidential

file of the court and in the present case the information sought by

the petitioner falls under this category, hence, exempted from

disclosure.

9. At this juncture this court finds it appropriate to refer to the

judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Girish

Ramchandra Deshpande Vs. Cen. Information Commr. and

Ors (2013) 1 SCC 212, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court held

that the information sought in that case pertained to the

performance of an employee/officer in an organization which is

[2025:RJ-JD:9354] (6 of 7) [CW-17433/2023]

primarily a matter between the employee and the employer and

hence is governed by the service rules which fall under the

expression "personal information" and the disclosure of such

information have no relationship to any public activity or public

interest. The relevant part of the aforesaid judgment is

reproduced as under:

"12. The Petitioner herein sought for copies of all memos, show cause notices and censure/punishment awarded to the third Respondent from his employer and also details viz. movable and immovable properties and also the details of his investments, lending and borrowing from Banks and other financial institutions. Further, he has also sought for the details of gifts stated to have accepted by the third Respondent, his family members and friends and relatives at the marriage of his son. The information mostly sought for finds a place in the income tax returns of the third Respondent. The question that has come up for consideration is whether the above-mentioned information sought for qualifies to be "personal information" as defined in Clause (j) of Section 8(1) of the RTI Act.

13. We are in agreement with the CIC and the courts below that the details called for by the Petitioner i.e. copies of all memos issued to the third Respondent, show cause notices and orders of censure/punishment etc. are qualified to be personal information as defined in Clause (j) of Section 8(1) of the RTI Act. The performance of an employee/officer in an organization is primarily a matter between the employee and the employer and normally those aspects are governed by the service rules which fall under the expression "personal information", the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or public interest. On the other hand, the disclosure of which would cause unwarranted invasion of privacy of that individual. of course, in a given case, if the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer of the Appellate Authority is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information, appropriate orders could be passed but the Petitioner cannot claim those details as a matter of right."

10. In the present case the petitioner sought information in

respect to the proceedings which are under process as indicated in

[2025:RJ-JD:9354] (7 of 7) [CW-17433/2023]

communication dated 19.08.2021 (Annex.4) thus, the same falls

into the category of 'personal information'. Moreover, the

petitioner has failed to demonstrate before this court that

disclosure of such information has relationship to any public

activity or interest or that the disclosure of such information

serves the larger public interest. Therefore, this court is of the

considered view that the information sought by the petitioner falls

under the exemption as laid down in Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act

as well as Rule 10 of Rajasthan RTI (High Court & Subordinate