Assistance given from PM's Relief Fund on recommendation of the Lok Sabha Speaker - details of individual citizens receiving assistance is personal information – CIC: PM’s Relief Fund does not receive any subsidy - information exempt u/s 8(1)(j)
13 Sep, 2013Assistance given from the PM's Relief Fund on recommendation of the Speaker of the Lok Sabha - details of individual citizens receiving assistance is personal information which is exempt u/s 8(1)(j) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information: Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person. Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information: Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person. – CIC: PM’s Relief Fund does not receive any budgetary assistance from the Central Government or any of the Central Government public undertakings and is fully made of voluntary donations given by individual citizens or private bodies - information exempt u/s 8(1)(j) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information: Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person. Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information: Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person.
Order
1. The Appellant had sought a number of information relating to the action taken on the correspondence received from the then Speaker of the Lok Sabha on a number of subjects. The desired information included the details of the assistance given from the PM's Relief Fund on the recommendation of the then Speaker. The CPIO had transferred part of the application to the Cabinet Secretariat and, as far as the assistance from the PM's Relief Fund is concerned, informed the CPIO that this could not be disclosed as exempted under section 8(1)(j) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information: Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person. Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information: Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person. of the Right to Information (RTI) Act. Not satisfied with this reply, the Appellant had preferred an appeal. The Appellate Authority had disposed of the appeal by endorsing the stand taken by the CPIO in this regard. He had relied on a decision of the CIC dated 6 June 2012 in which it had been held that “seeking relief from the Prime Minister's Relief Fund is strictly a personal decision and the individual citizens seeking such assistance have a reputation to protect. Making public the names and the amount of money they received from the fund has the potential to compromise their privacy.”
2. During the hearing, the Appellant argued that the desired information should be disclosed as it would demonstrate if there was any difference in the manner in which the authorities in the PM's Relief Fund dealt with the request for assistance from an ordinary citizen and the recommendation of the then Speaker of the Lok Sabha. He also submitted that since the Prime Minister's Relief Fund was considered to be a public authority, every single information held by it should be made public. He did not agree with the view that the disclosure of the details of the recipients of the assistance would cause any infringement of their privacy because, in his opinion, anybody who wanted assistance from a public fund should be prepared to get his name known to the rest of the public. He submitted that, if at all, the CPIO should follow the section 11 procedure before deciding whether to disclose the details of the individual recipients or not On the other hand, the respondent submitted that the CIC had, in the past, in its order dated 6 June 2012, in the case number CIC/SM/A/2011/001800, decided against disclosing such details.
3. We have carefully considered the facts of the case. We have already decided in the past, as stated above, that the details of the individual recipients of assistance from the Prime Minister's Relief Fund should be treated as personal information and not disclosed unless there is a larger public interest to be served. Merely because the authorities might have decided on the recommendation of the then Speaker for grant of assistance to some individuals, those individuals cannot be differentiated from all other recipients for after all, there may be thousands of other such recipients, are recommended by other public representatives. The fact is that when an individual citizen, often in an indigent condition, seeks assistance from the Prime Minister's Relief Fund, he does not expect that this fact would be advertised in the public. Had the Prime Minister's Relief Fund been created out of funds provided by the Central Government from out of its budget, the assistance should be treated like any other subsidy and fully covered under the provisions of section 4(1)(b) Every public authority shall publish within one hundred and twenty days from the enactment of this Act,- (i) the particulars of its organisation, functions and duties; (ii) the powers and duties of its officers and employees; (iii) the procedure followed in the decision making process, including channels of supervision and accountability; (iv) the norms set by it for the discharge of its functions; (v) the rules, regulations, instructions, manuals and records, held by it or under its control or used by its employees for discharging its functions; (vi) a statement of the categories of documents that are held by it or under its control; (vii) the particulars of any arrangement that exists for consultation with, or representation by, the members of the public in relation to the formulation of its policy or implementation thereof; (viii) a statement of the boards, councils, committees and other bodies consisting of two or more persons constituted as its part or for the purpose of its advice, and as to whether meetings of those boards, councils, committees and other bodies are open to the public, or the minutes of such meetings are accessible for public; (ix) a directory of its officers and employees; (x) the monthly remuneration received by each of its officers and employees, including the system of compensation as provided in its regulations; (xi) the budget allocated to each of its agency, indicating the particulars of all plans, proposed expenditures and reports on disbursements made; (xii) the manner of execution of subsidy programmes, including the amounts allocated and the details of beneficiaries of such programmes; (xiii) particulars of recipients of concessions, permits or authorisations granted by it; (xiv) details in respect of the information, available to or held by it, reduced in an electronic form; (xv) the particulars of facilities available to citizens for obtaining information, including the working hours of a library or reading room, if maintained for public use; (xvi) the names, designations and other particulars of the Public Information Officers; (xvii) such other information as may be prescribed and thereafter update these publications every year; of the Right to Information (RTI) Act and, even, proactively disclosed. Here, it is not so; we understand that the Prime Minister's Relief Fund does not receive any budgetary assistance from the Central Government or from any of the Central Government public undertakings and is fully made of voluntary donations given by individual citizens or private bodies. Therefore, the assistance given out of this fund cannot be classified as subsidy at the same level at which all others subsidies are treated.
4. Therefore, in our opinion, there is no reason for us to change our decision. The details of the individual citizens receiving assistance from the Prime Minister's Relief Fund shall continue to be treated as personal information and not disclosed under RTI.
5. The appeal is disposed off accordingly.
(Satyananda Mishra)
Chief Information Commissioner
Citation: Shri Subhash Chandra Agrawal v. Prime Minister’s Office in File No. CIC/SM/A/2013/000582