The cause of death of his late father as intimated to the LIC by Ms Santosh Kumari (beneficiary) was denied under section 8(1)(j) - PIO: the third party has denied the disclosure of such information to a notice u/s 11 - CIC: cause of death to be provided
Appellant submitted RTI application dated 17 September 2012 before the CPIO, LIC of India, Chandigarh seeking details regarding the claims of the Policies in the name of Mr. Manmohan Jand (nos. 162491077, 163642631 and 163186902) through multiple points.
2. Vide Order dated 11 October 2012, disclosure of information was denied 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. of the RTI Act by the CPIO, as the information sought pertains to the ‘third party’ and the said party has denied the disclosure of such information u/s 11 of the Act.
3. Not satisfied with the response, appellant preferred first Appeal dated 22 The provisions of this Act shall have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in the Official Secrets Act, 1923 (19 of 1923), and any other law for the time being in force or in any instrument having effect by virtue of any law other than this Act. October 2012 to the First Appellate Authority.
4. Vide Order dated 24 November 2012, CPIO’s Order was upheld by the FAA.
5. Being aggrieved and not being satisfied by the above response of the public authority, the appellant preferred second appeal before the Commission.
6. Matter was heard today via videoconferencing. Respondent as above were heard from Chandigarh. Appellant made submissions from Patiala. CPIO submitted that Ms. Santosh Kumari was the nominee in respect of the three policies issued in the name of late Shri Manmohan Jand. Appellant submitted that he is the son of Shri Manmohan Jand and seeks to have information regarding the cause of death of his late father as intimated to the public authority by Ms Santosh Kumari.
7. After hearing both the parties Commission is satisfied that information regarding the cause of death of the appellant's father Shri Manmohan Jand, as intimated to the public authority by Ms Santosh Kumari will be provided to the appellant within two weeks of receipt of the order. We are satisfied that the disclosure of this information will not impinge on the privacy of the third party in any manner.
(Smt. Deepak Sandhu)
Chief Information Commissioner
Citation: Shri Sunny Jand, Patiala v. L.I.C in Appeal: No. CIC/DS/A/2012/002757