Can a 'surety' seek third party information under RTI?
The appellant sought the details about the House Property which was built by securing Joint Housing loan. The Public Information (PIO) provided part information and refused to provide rest of the information under section 8(1)(g) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information, the disclosure of which would endanger the life or physical safety of any person or identify the source of information or assistance given in confidence for law enforcement or security purposes; and 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. of the RTI Act.
During the hearing, the appellant stated that he sought this information on account of the fact that he has stood as surety for the third party in respect of housing loan taken by them from the Comptroller Co-Operatives Bank and LIC Housing Finance Ltd. and he wishes to produce the requested information before the court as the third party was absconding. The respondent stated that LIC Housing Finance Ltd is a separate entity.
View of CIC
The Central Information Commission (CIC) noted that the LIC Housing Finance Ltd. has filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court challenging the decision of the CIC declaring it a public authority and has also taken stay on the implementation of the said order of the Commission. The respondent could not confirm the current status of the case in High Court. The Commission ruled that if the order of the CIC has been upheld by the High Court then the appellant can prefer RTI application before the PIO, LIC Housing Finance Ltd. providing all the details of the loan account and PIO will provide information to the appellant as he is a surety in the present case.
Citation: Mr. H.N. Manjappa v. LIC of India in Appeal No. CIC/DS/A/2011/002525
RTI Citation : RTIFI/2012/CIC/490
Click here to view original RTI order of Court / Information Commission