Chhattisgarh High CourtAdministrative and Public LawHuman Rights Law

Chhattisgarh HC Directs School Officials to Withhold Lecturers’ Personal Information Sought Under RTI Where Section 8(1)(j) Applies

BHAKTA PRAHALAD RAJWADEv.STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

Chhattisgarh HC Directs School Officials to Withhold Lecturers’ Personal Information Sought Under RTI Where Section 8(1)(j) Applies. BHAKTA PRAHALAD RAJWADE vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH. Chhattisgarh High Court. LawLens
The LawLens card for this judgmentXLinkedInWhatsApp

In brief

The question

Whether the authorities should be directed not to disclose the petitioners’ personal information claimed to be exempt under Section 8(1)(j) of the Right to Information Act, 2005.

The court held

The petitions were disposed of with a direction to the concerned authorities not to disclose the petitioners’ personal information claimed to be exempt under Section 8(1)(j), in accordance with law.

It also directed

The petitioners retained liberty to seek an appropriate remedy if a cause of action arose in future, and the Court issued no notice to the information seekers.

01Facts

The petitioners, government school lecturers, alleged that education authorities were disclosing or were likely to disclose their service records and other personal documents to information seekers under the Right to Information Act, 2005.

¶ 2

They sought to prevent disclosure of those documents and also requested a broad restraint against known and unknown persons seeking or publishing them.

¶ 3

The State submitted that a school principal had already stated by letter dated 29 September 2026 that third-party personal information could not be furnished to the information seeker.

¶ 4

The High Court considered the connected petitions together.

¶ 1

02Issues

i.Whether the authorities should be directed not to disclose the petitioners’ personal information claimed to be exempt under Section 8(1)(j) of the Right to Information Act, 2005.

¶ 3, 6

ii.Whether the petitioners were entitled to the broader restraint sought against known or unknown persons seeking, procuring, or publishing their personal records.

¶ 2

03Law Applied

The Court referred to Section 8(1)(j) of the Right to Information Act, 2005, under which personal information may be exempt from disclosure, and directed the authorities not to disclose information claimed to fall within that exemption “in accordance with law”.

¶ 6

The order states no further test for applying the exemption and cites no precedent.

¶ 6

Provisions in the judgment · 1 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Right to Information Act, 2005 Section 8

04Reasoning

The Court considered the petitioners’ claim that the requested service and personal documents were exempt under Section 8(1)(j), alongside the State’s submission that the concerned authority had already declined disclosure.

¶ 3–5

It disposed of the petitions by directing the authorities to withhold information claimed to be exempt, subject to the Act and the law applicable to the particular information.

¶ 6

It did not grant the requested omnibus restraint against information seekers or publishers; it instead left the petitioners free to pursue an appropriate remedy if a future cause of action arose.

¶ 2, 7

05Holding

The petitions were disposed of with a direction to the concerned authorities not to disclose the petitioners’ personal information claimed to be exempt under Section 8(1)(j), in accordance with law.

¶ 6

The petitioners retained liberty to seek an appropriate remedy if a cause of action arose in future, and the Court issued no notice to the information seekers.

¶ 7–9
Chhattisgarh High Court

Original Court PDF

BHAKTA PRAHALAD RAJWADEvsSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

Chhattisgarh High Court · October 26, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment