What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that information pertaining to income tax returns is considered 'personal information' and is exempted from disclosure under Section 8(1)(j) of the Right to Information Act. Following a Supreme Court judgment on similar grounds, the impugned order was quashed.

Respondent No. 1 sought personal information from the petitioner, a Regional Transport Officer, including salary particulars, appointment order, service register, and assets/liabilities. The petitioner refused, claiming it was personal information.

What were the issues?

Whether salary particulars, appointment order, service register, and list of assets/liabilities constitute 'personal information' exempt from disclosure under the Right to Information Act.

Sri Pralhad Raghavendra Rao Desai… vs Syed Shabbar Hussain | Karnataka High Court 2015

: 1 : IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH ON THE 10TH DAY OF JULY, 2015 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH WRIT PETITION No.62510/2009 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: SRI PRALHAD RAGHAVENDRA RAO DESAI, (P.R.DESAI), AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, RESIDENT OF DESAI BUILDING, KUSHTAGI ROAD, B.T.PATIL NAGAR, TALUK AND DISTRICT KOPPAL583 231. … PETITIONER (BY SRI.R.M.KULKARNI, ADV.) AND: 1. SYED SHABBAR HUSSAIN, FATHER’S NAME NOT KNOWN TO PETITIONER, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS HUSSAIN MOHALLA, TEGGINA KERA, WARD NO.18, KOPPAL-583 231. 2. THE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER & REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER KOPPAL. 3. THE STATE INFORMATION COMMISSIONER KARNATAKA INFORMATION COMMISSION GATE NO 1, III STAGE, III FLOOR, M S BUILDING, BANGALORE 560001.

: 2 : 4. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT, M S BUILDING, FIRST FLOOR, VIDHANA VEEDHI BANGALORE 560001. … RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.VEENA HEGDE, HCGP FOR R2 AND 4, R1 AND R3 SD) THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DT.16/01/09 PASSED BY R-3 AT ANN-G AND ETC., THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER The respondent No.1 sought for certain information from the petitioner who was working as the Regional Transport Officer. The information was with reference to his salary particulars namely his appointment order, service register as well as the list of his assets and liabilities. Since the same was not replied, he approached the Karnataka Information Commission. A notice was issued to the petitioner. He replied stating that it is his personal information. The Commission by the impugned order directed the petitioner to provide the information on payment of Rs.62/- towards the cost of supply of information of 31 pages. However, so far as list of assets and liabilities is concerned, by placing reliance on the judgment in

: 3 : W.P.No.7953/2007 dated 16.07.2008, directed the petitioner to furnish the said details. Aggrieved by the said order, the present petition is filed. 2. The division bench of this Court in W.A.No.1634/2009 have held that information pertaining to income tax returns are to be considered as ‘personal information’ which stand exempted from disclosure under clause (j) of Section 8(1) of the Right to Information Act. The said view was supported by the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in S.L.P.(Civil) No.27734/2012. 3. The information sought for herein is identical to the information sought for in the aforesaid writ appeal. 4. Therefore, following the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, this petition is allowed. The order dated 16.01.2009 in KIC 5656 COM 2008 passed by respondent No.3 vide Annexure-G is quashed. [Sd/-] JUDGE Jm/-

SRI PRALHAD RAGHAVENDRA RAO DESAI (P R DESAI) vs. SYED SHABBAR HUSSAIN

What did the High Court hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments