16 proviso to section 7 of the RTI Act for postponing disclosure has become redundant. He lastly submits that the petitioner is to make out a case of larger public interest before the Election Commission in a fresh application, if they so desire for such disclosure; and then the Election Commission would have the opportunity to decide on the issue of public interest, if at all involved, after hearing objections from the political parties concern. Ms. Amatul Karim, the learned Deputy Attorney General appearing for the respondent No.1-Information Commission submits that the respondent No.1 had acted as per the provision of section 25 of the RTI Act, 2009 and accordingly disposed of the petitioners’ Complaint No. 57/2014 and thereby committed no illegality. In the circumstances, she prays for discharging the Rule. We have heard the learned Advocates of both the contending parties and have perused the writ petition and the affidavit-inoppositions. It appears that the petitioner No.1 submitted an application to the designated Officer (RTI) of the Election Commission on 12.06.2013 requesting him to provide photocopies of the audited annual statements of accounts filed by the registered political parties for all calendar years to the Election Commission (Annexure-A). In response thereto, the said designated Officer (RTI) by Memo No. 17.00.0000.040.22.001.10-80 dated 14.07.2013 informed the petitioner No.1 that the information requested by him were not