Central Information Commission directs Southern Railway to share income details of official under RTI

The Central Information Commission has directed Southern Railway to share an employee’s income details with his estranged wife, who was seeking information for a maintenance case.

After the Public Information Officer refused to provide the latest salary details of the employee, a Senior Division Engineer, and said that the information was exempt from disclosure as it belonged to a third party, the petitioner appealed to the CIC.

Claiming that her husband had left her due to marital issue and divorce proceedings were ongoing in the Family Court in Chennai, the woman said that the officer’s last salary was required to support her interim maintenance petition. She also asked for a copy of her husband’s community certificate so that her daughter could apply for the same category.

Excluded from disclosure

When the case came up for hearing, the PIO submitted that the appellant’s petition was examined and he was informed that no information could be given due to third party related details mentioned under Section 11 of the RTI Act, 2005. Such information is exempt from disclosure under Sections 8(1)(j) and 11 of the Act. Further, the PIO said that the third party (the petitioner’s husband) did not agree to share the information with him.

After hearing both the parties, Central Information Commissioner Vinod Kumar Tiwari said that the Commission deals with cases involving the actual matrix of one spouse demanding the pay slip of another due to marital dispute and the position maintained by the Commission so far is that the information sought in the RTI Application belongs to the personal information of a third party and is duly exempted under the provisions of the Act.

However, after citing the 2010 Supreme Court of India judgment against the Subhash Chandra Agarwal case, it directed the PIO to provide “general details of net taxable income/gross income” of the estranged husband. Before this, the public authority must ensure that the petitioner is the legally wedded spouse of the officer and also that a matrimonial/maintenance case is pending in the relevant court.