MDA told to release official’s record as PIC rejects privacy, privilege claims

LAHORE: The Punjab Information Commission has directed the Multan Development Authority (MDA) to release the recruitment, posting and service records of one of its officials, rejecting its claims of privacy and legal privilege as grounds for denial under the Punjab Transparency and Right to Information Act, 2013.

The order was issued in Complaint No. 5-8-2025-14 filed by Advocate Ghulam Ghous against the MDA Multan managing director.

The complainant had filed an RTI application on June 12, 2025, seeking certified copies of 13 categories of documents related to the appointment and service record of an MDA official, including the advertisement, test and interview marks, offer and joining letters, degree verification, charge assumption reports for various legal posts, official residence and vehicle allotment letters, and any disciplinary proceedings.

MDA declined to provide the information, citing Articles 9 and 14 of the Constitution, Article 9 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order (QSO) 1984, and Section 13(1)(b) and (c) of the RTI Act. It argued that the information was privileged, its disclosure could harm the dignity and privacy of the official, and that the complainant, being a lawyer, had a personal issue with the individual concerned. The authority requested that the case be treated as exempted.

The Commission rejected these arguments, holding that Article 9, which protects life and liberty, had no application, while Article 14(1) pertains to privacy of the home and dignity, which were not involved. It also held that Article 9 of QSO 1984, which protects attorney-client communications, was irrelevant.

The order stated that Section 24(2) of the RTI Act gives overriding effect to the Act and does not allow external legal provisions to expand exemptions beyond those listed in Section 13(1). For Section 13(1)(b) to apply, there must be a legitimate privacy interest and a demonstrable threat to that interest, which MDA failed to establish. No explanation was provided as to what privacy interest would be jeopardised by releasing recruitment and posting information related to a public post.

The Commission further noted that even the recruitment advertisement, which is already a public document, was not shared. It stressed that test and interview marks must be publicly accessible, citing the Supreme Court’s 2017 SCMR 637 judgment and two Sindh High Court judgments (CP No. D-1708 of 2018 and CP No. D-1079 of 2023), which mandate transparency in recruitment. The remaining requested records relate to official postings, perks, and disciplinary matters, all of which fall within the public domain.

Concluding the hearing, Information Commissioner Bushra Sial and Chief Information Commissioner Muhammad Malik Bhulla allowed the complaint and directed MDA’s Public Information Officer to dispatch certified copies of all requested records to the complainant within seven days, under intimation to the Commission.

When this reporter contacted MDA’s Deputy Director and Public Information Officer Umair Khan, he said the case regarding public information about Assistant Director Legal MDA, Arslan Zafar, was pending with the Punjab Information Commission.

“We asked the Commission to give exemption under Section 13(1)(b) of the Punjab Transparency and Right to Information Act 2013. We didn’t receive any orders regarding rejection of our exemption plea. As soon as we get the orders, we will act according to the law,” he added.