The Correct Answer is: 2) Girish Ramachandra Deshpande vs Central Information Commission and others Explanation & Key Takeaways: • Girish Ramachandra Deshpande filed an RTI application requesting information on the salary of another public servant, Mr. Shrikar P. Kardile, and copies of memos, show cause notices, and censures against him. He also requested details of the movable and immovable properties of Mr. Kardile, his investments, expenditures, and his family's expenditures and investments. • The public information officer refused to disclose this information, citing Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, which exempts personal information from disclosure if it does not serve any public interest. • An appeal was made to the Central Information Commission (CIC), which ordered the disclosure of the information. However, taking the matter to the High Court resulted in the CIC's order being overturned. • Finally, the matter came before the Supreme Court of India. The apex court agreed with the High Court's decision and ruled that such personal information, including assets, liabilities, and properties, of public servants are not to be disclosed under the RTI Act. • The Supreme Court cited the reason that the disclosure of such information has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or it would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless a larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information. • The court clarified that while the RTI Act seeks to create an era of transparency, it does not mean that the privacy rights of individuals, including public officials, are completely overruled. There needs to be a balance between the right to information and the right to privacy.