BIHAR PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION versus SAIYED HUSSAIN ABBAS RIZWI & ANR.

BIHAR PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION versus SAIYED HUSSAIN ABBAS RIZWI & ANR.

Disclosure of names and addresses of interview board members by the Public Service Commission is exempt under s.8(1)(g) of the Right to Information Act, 2005, as it would endanger their life or physical safety, and serve no public purpose. The Commission is not required to disclose such information; only marks may...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Bihar Public Service Commission; Respondent: Saiyed Hussain Abbas Rizwi; Respondent: Anr.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
13 December 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Allowed by Supreme Court; High Court Decision Set Aside
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgment of High Court set aside.
Legal Topics
Disclosure Under RTI Act, Public Authority Definition, Exemptions Under RTI Act, Safety and Privacy Concerns, Balancing Transparency and Privacy
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Right to Information Disclosure Under RTI Act Public Authority Definition Exemptions Under RTI Act Safety and Privacy Concerns Balancing Transparency and Privacy

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bihar Public Service Commission

Appellant

Saiyed Hussain Abbas Rizwi

Respondent

Anr.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Allowed by Supreme Court; High Court Decision Set Aside

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether State Public Service Commission is a 'public authority' under s.2(h) of RTI Act
  2. 2 Whether disclosure of names and addresses of interview board members is required under RTI Act
  3. 3 Scope and limitation of 'right to information' under RTI Act, especially s.8(1)(g) and 11

Ratio Decidendi

Disclosure of names and addresses of interview board members by the Public Service Commission is exempt under s.8(1)(g) of the Right to Information Act, 2005, as it would endanger their life or physical safety, and serve no public purpose. The Commission is not required to disclose such information; only marks may be disclosed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgment of High Court set aside.

Orders

  • Commission is not bound to disclose names and addresses of interview board members.
  • Only collective marks may be disclosed as permitted by authorities.