To,

The Central Public Information Officer

_________________________________

Sub: - First Appeal under 19 (1) of RTI Act, 2005

My Reference Letter No: _________dated _________.

Your Reference Letter No:__________ dated________

Sir,

1. The appellant is constrained to file a First Appeal u/s 19 (1) of RTI Act to your esteemed office against
not providing information.

The brief FACTS of this matter are:-

a. That the appellant has submitted TEP under reference no_________dated ________ & RTI application
under reference no ____________dated _________ in the office of Commissioner of IncomeTax
,Lucknow (Attached as Annexure-A).

My GROUNDS for the appeal are as follows:-

a) BECAUSE, The information sought falls within the ambit of RTI Act 2005 and the information is
existing therein and can be provided as per Honble High Court of Delhi decision in regard of Bhagat
Singh Vs Chief Information Commissioner & Others WP(C) No. 3114/2007 dated 03/12/2007(Attached as
Annexure C).

b) BECAUSE, The Honorable High Court of Delhi in the Case of Neera Singh Vs the State (State Govt. of
NCT of Delhi) & Others-CRL.M.C.7262/2006-23-02-2007 Copy (Attached As Annexure-D) has given
ruling for such investigations in matter involving huge dowry amounts. (Attached as Annexure D).

c) BECAUSE, The information sought falls within the ambit of RTI Act 2005 and the information is existing
therein and can be provided as per Honble High Court of Delhi decision in regard of Director of Income
tax (Investigation) and others Vs Bhagat Singh LPA No. 3114/2007 dated 17/12/2007. The information
asked is only furnished by Income Tax Department and it required expediently in the interest of Justice.
(Attached as Annexure E)

d) BECAUSE, Under the provision of act if the application was rejected by the PIO himself and not by any
other authority, in the instance case my application under section 6 has not been rejected by PIO
himself but by any other third officer who is not the competent authority.
e) BECAUSE, PIO has not acted judicially after applying his mind as per provision of act since mere
writing _____________ dated ________
2009 which stays that information sought by you is of third party
information, which cannot be provided to you and therefore your
petition is rejected u/s 8(1)(J) of RTI act is not and cannot be a justify ground. The rejection should have
been speaking order that how the information is a third party.

f) BECAUSE, as per provision of the act before the rejection of the application on the ground of the third
party information the PIO should asked the third party and also should have given me a opportunity to
present my case.

g) BECAUSE, the large public interest which overwrites the third party interest, the PIO has failed to act
so.

h) BECAUSE, On the same kind of application CPIO Office of Commissioner of Income Tax Delhi has
provided the details asked by applicants.

i) BECAUSE, the PIO has failed to access the information available to him in his statutory capacity as PIO
u/s 5(1) of RTI Act read with 5 (4) and 5 (5) of the RTI Act.

j) BECAUSE, the PIO failed to invoke the provision of section 10 of the act why invoking the provisions of
8(1)(J).

k) Since total expenditure of Rs _______ lacs ( lacs only) has been claimed by in Shri XYZ , so it is a
natural curiosity that what was the source of fund .If you disclose it then doubt of black money will be
removed from my mind and this way the information will fulfill the objective of RTI to check the
corruption as said by Hon'ble justice Shri Pradeep Kant in the recent judgement under Writ Petition No.
3262 (MB) of 2008,Public Information Officer Vs. State Information Commission, U.P. and others,

l) It becomes increasingly imminent and added responsibility of the concerned authorities to make an
enquiry into such allegations and ascertain the actual truth behind the true source, if any, of these
alleged payments / expenses, so as that innocent people like me does not get harassed due to the ultier
motives of some mischievous people.

m) The objective of the RTI act is to provide information to the person who sought such information and
when the case involves a serious question whereby the applicant seeks the information to better defend
himself in the court of law the information sought becomes more important. Since criminal
jurisprudence, it is clear that innocent person should not be convicted and a person is presumed
innocent unless found guilty/convicted. Since, it is very important principle of natural justice that against
whom a complaint has been made has every right to know its contents so as to defend himself
effectively and to prove that the complainant has approached various authorities only with an oblique
motive. Thus in the process defaming the undersigned and causing the undersigned mental agony and
harassment.

n) That the refusal on the part of the Respondent No. 1 is without any justification and disclosure of the
information would have NO effect to any public activity and would not be an unwarranted invasion of
the privacy of the individual.

o) That the respondent cannot refrain from disclosing the information on baseless pleas of public
interest or invasion of privacy or information falls under category of IIIrd party when the issue involved
is of serious nature as in the present case F.I.R. has been registered against the undersigned / appellant.

p) That under the Universal Declaration of the Human Rights adopted by the united nation in 1948
assured by article 19 that every one has right to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through
any media, regardless of the frontiers.

q) That in Secretary, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Govt. of India and others Vs. Cricket
Association of Bengal and others, 1995(2) SCC 161 the Honble Apex Court has remarks about this right
in the following term:-
a. The right to freedom of speech and expression includes the right to receive and impart information.
For ensuring the free speech right of the citizens of this country, it is necessary that the citizens have the
benefits of plurality of views and a range of opinions on all public issues. A successful democracy posits
an aware citizenry. Diversity of opinions, views, ideas and ideologies is essential to enable the citizens
to arrive at informed judgement on all issues touching them.

r) Those by refusing the information sought, the respondent will defeat the object of the act i.e. RTI for
which it was created. The object of the Act is to provide for setting out the practical regime of the right
to information for citizens to secure access to information under the control of public authorities, in
order to promote transparency and accountability in the working of every public authority. The
constitution of India has established democratic republic and democracy requires an informed citizenry
and transparency of information which are vital to its functioning and also to contain the corruption and
to hold governments and their instrumentalities accountable to the governed. Therefore, it is expedient
to provide for furnishing certain information to citizens who desire to have it.

s) That by refusing the information, the respondent has completely disregarded the fundamental right
under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India, the appellant most respectfully submits that the right
to information was explicitly held to be a fundamental right under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of
India for the first time by Justice K. K. Methew in State of U.P. Vs. Raj Narain 1975 4 SCC 428.

t) That access to information under section 3 of the Act is the rule and exemption under section 11, the
exception. Mere saying that the information would invade anybodys privacy and falls under the
category of IIIrd party is no ground to deny the information to those who require the said information
for suitably protecting their fundamental rights as well as to protect them selves from the rigmarole of
trial. By refusal of the information, the respondent is trying to dodge the appellant of his reasonable
demand for the information.

u) That the right based enactment is akin to welfare measure and the act should receive a liberal
interpretation and therefore the appellant be granted the information forthwith without any legal
wrangles and complications.

v) That the appellant has come on the very first opportunity available to him and therefore the
information should not be denied to him. More over the appellant does not wants to use the
information for any oblique motive but wants to use the information to better defend himself.

w) That the refusal on the part of the respondent would only encourage more and more mischievous
persons to make false, frivolous and totally baseless complaints against the responsible citizens of the
country, in order to settle their personal scores and harass and put them under severe mental agony at
the hands of the system. Had this information been provided at the very first instance, the
appellant/undersigned would have provided the authorities with the vital truth about the whole case
and the complete matter would have taken the turn on its head.

x) That the refusals on the part of the respondent show the lackadaisical approach and therefore the
appellant request your good self to initiate action against the respondent under section 20 of the RTI
Act.

y) Whether the respondent no.1 has complied with section 11(1) of the RTI Act-2005 and whether the
respondent no.1 given a written notice to the third party, It is reasonable apprehension of the appellant
that no such notice as is required under section 11(1) of the RTI Act has been issued to Shri. XYZ and
refusal of information by the respondent no.1 to the appellant is bad in law and is contrary to the
objective of the RTI Act 2005 and the respondent no.1 has used a flip-flop tactics to deny information
to the appellant. Since the information sought is neither a trade nor commercial secret protected by any
law nor the sought information disclosure would be contrary to public interest.

According the appellant is constrained to PRAY for the following relief:

In view of the above it is therefore prayed that:
i. Kindly provide the appellant with the copy of the information sought of by the appellant in his
application so as to better defend himself.
ii. The appellant has enclosed a copy of relevant judgments in which Honorable High Court of Delhi has
given ruling for such investigations in matter involving huge dowry amounts with application of dated
11th June, 2009.(attached as Annexure C & D with application of dated 11th June,2009)
iii. That the PIO be ordered to provide the appellant the requested information forthwith.
iv. That a personal hearing be afforded to the appellant u/s 19(5) of RTI Act and interests of natural
justice in the event the PIO opts to justify and/ or prove the willful denial of information to the
appellant.
v. That a copy of comments/ reply of PIO, if any, to this First Appeal be provided to the appellant well in
advance of the hearing date.
Further for contesting the election every candidate is required to provide information regarding his
property/assets during filing of nomination which is disclosed even in news papers and media so that
every citizen can know the assets of the candidate. When such rigorous norms are fixed for Candidates
for elections, who are in service for only the limited term of their office, the government servants,
engaged in life long service cannot be exempted. Rather I am of the opinion that the public authorities
should Suo Moto publish these information in their official websites under Section 4 of the RTI Act. This
action is expected in the light of decision of Honble Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal No. 7178 of
2001- Union of India Vs Association for Democratic Reforms and another.

Yours Faithfully,
Husband
Add:
Mobile

Verification

I, the deponent named herein do verify that the facts as narrated above are true and corrent to my best
knowledge and belief.

Deponent
Enclosures Annexure: ( A to G)

Annexure- A: - RTI application RTI

Annexure- B: - Copy of letter from cit
Annexure- C: - Copy of Honble High Court order WP(C) No. 3114/2007.
Annexure- D :- Copy of Honble High Court Judgment CRL.M.C.7762/2006.
Annexure -E: - Copy of Honble High Court order
Annexure- F: - Copy of FIR Submitted by My Wife .
Annexure-G: - Copy of TEP

hfhfgcg