Bhubaneswar: The Odisha State Information Commission (SIC) has ruled that a woman has the right to access the salary details of her husband who is a government employee, directing the Public Information Officer (PIO) of Khallikote Block in Ganjam district to furnish the information within 15 days.
The order came in response to a second appeal filed by Archana Panigrahi, who had sought the salary slip and basic pay details of her husband, Biranchi Narayan Sahu, an employee in the office of the Block Development Officer (BDO), Khallikote. Her RTI request was earlier rejected by both the PIO and the First Appellate Authority under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, citing “personal information.”
During the hearing, Panigrahi argued that as the legally wedded wife, she was entitled to know her husband’s salary details, especially since a matrimonial and maintenance case is pending before a judicial court.
State Information Commissioner Susanta Kumar Mohanty, after hearing both parties, held that the public authority had “partially misinterpreted” the exemption clause. He noted that the salary of a public servant is paid from the government exchequer and falls under voluntary disclosure norms of Section 4(1)(b) of the RTI Act.
Citing key precedents from the Central Information Commission and various High Courts, including the Dr. Dheeraj Kapoor case and Soma Majumdar vs Eastern Coalfields, the Commission reaffirmed that a spouse has the right to know the salary particulars of a government employee.
However, Mohanty clarified that while the basic pay, net income, or take-home salary must be disclosed, details relating to personal deductions, loans, savings, or allowances are exempt as they constitute “personal information” and would amount to an unwarranted invasion of privacy.
The SIC thus directed the Khallikote PIO to provide the relevant salary particulars to the appellant within 15 days, while rejecting her request for additional financial details that fall under the privacy exemption.
With this direction, the second appeal was disposed of.
