‘public interest’ to mean the general welfare of the public

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 10044 OF 2010

CENTRAL PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER,

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ….. APPELLANT(S)

VERSUS

SUBHASH CHANDRA AGARWAL ….. RESPONDENT(S)

W I T H

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 10045 OF 2010

A N D

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2683 OF 2010

J U D G M E N T

SANJIV KHANNA, J.

 

74. This Court in Bihar Public Service Commission v. Saiyed 

Hussain Abbas Rizwi and Another50 has held that the phrase 

‘public interest’ in Section 8(1)(j) has to be understood in its true 

connotation to give complete meaning to the relevant provisions of 

the RTI Act. However, the RTI Act does not specifically identify 

factors to be taken into account in determining where the public 

50 (2012) 13 SCC 61

Civil Appeal No. 10044 of 2010 & Ors. Page 87 of 108

interest lies. Therefore, it is important to understand the meaning 

of the expression ‘public interest’ in the context of the RTI Act. 

This Court held ‘public interest’ to mean the general welfare of the 

public warranting the disclosure and the protection applicable, in 

which the public as a whole has a stake, and observed:

“23. The satisfaction has to be arrived at by the 

authorities objectively and the consequences of such 

disclosure have to be weighed with regard to the 

circumstances of a given case. The decision has to be 

based on objective satisfaction recorded for ensuring 

that larger public interest outweighs unwarranted 

invasion of privacy or other factors stated in the 

provision. Certain matters, particularly in relation to 

appointment, are required to be dealt with great 

confidentiality. The information may come to 

knowledge of the authority as a result of disclosure by 

others who give that information in confidence and with 

complete faith, integrity and fidelity. Secrecy of such 

information shall be maintained, thus, bringing it within 

the ambit of fiduciary capacity. Similarly, there may be 

cases where the disclosure has no relationship to any 

public activity or interest or it may even cause 

unwarranted invasion of privacy of the individual. All 

these protections have to be given their due 

implementation as they spring from statutory 

exemptions. It is not a decision simpliciter between 

private interest and public interest. It is a matter where 

a constitutional protection is available to a person with 

regard to the right to privacy. Thus, the public interest 

has to be construed while keeping in mind the balance 

factor between right to privacy and right to information 

with the purpose sought to be achieved and the 

purpose that would be served in the larger public 

interest, particularly when both these rights emerge 

from the constitutional values under the Constitution of 

India.”

Civil Appeal No. 10044 of 2010 & Ors. Page 88 of 108

75. Public interest in access to information refers to something that is 

in the interest of the public welfare to know. Public welfare is 

widely different from what is of interest to the public. “Something 

which is of interest to the public” and “something which is in the 

public interest” are two separate and different parameters. For 

example, the public may be interested in private matters with 

which the public may have no concern and pressing need to 

know. However, such interest of the public in private matters 

would repudiate and directly traverse the protection of privacy. 

The object and purpose behind the specific exemption vide clause 

(j) to Section 8(1) is to protect and shield oneself from 

unwarranted access to personal information and to protect facets 

like reputation, honour, etc. associated with the right to privacy.

Similarly, there is a public interest in the maintenance of 

confidentiality in the case of private individuals and even 

government, an aspect we have already discussed.