CIC: Accounts of subscribers maintained at EPFO are held under fiduciary relationship & information relating to such accounts is personal in nature and exempt from disclosure to third party under Section 8(1)(e) & (j) of the RTI Act
27 Dec, 2014Information sought:-
The appellant has sought the following information:-
1. Whether PF amount in connection with the Account No. TN/MD/29747/549 in relating to member Mr. M Sankaran S/o Mr. R S Mariappan, regarding at Solai Colony, PKN Road, Sivakasi East had received or debited in his bank account in relating to the PF Settlement amount and pension arrears? How much amount? Which Dates? And which bank?
2. Whether the amount in relating to EPF and pension arrears amount are settled and credited? His claim application submitted by Mr. M Sankaran member no. TN/MD/29747(549) form No. 19 and 10 D is attested by the employer or notary public or any other public officer?
3. Whether his EPF and pension arrears are settled and amount has been credited in his bank account. Which Bank? Which Date? Whether his employer concern M/s Cornation Papercaps Industries Code No. TN/MD/29747 is existing or closed one?
4. If the amount has been credited without employer’s attestation? If so in which provision or what authority the amount has been credited?
Grounds for the Second Appeal: The CPIO has denied the information 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.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing: The following were present
Appellant: Mr. K. Jeyasankar through VC Respondent: Mr. K Rajan CAPIO through VC
The appellant stated that he wants to know whether the EPFO authorities have complied with the guidelines as prescribed under Section 72(5 & 6) of the EPFO Scheme while settling the claim of Shri M. Sankaran. The CAPIO stated that they have strictly complied with the guidelines as there is a provision in the manual of accounting procedure [para No. 10(1)(h)] which states that the employee, in case of difficulty, can get his claim form attested by any eligible authority as listed therein. He informed that Shri Sankaran’s claim was attested by the Notary Public. The appellant stated that he wants to know the date when the claim was settled, the amount and details of the bank account in which the proceeds were credited. The CAPIO stated that the information relates to a third party, is personal in nature and exempt under Section 8(1)(e) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship, unless the competent authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship, unless the competent authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; & (j) of the RTI Act.
Decision notice:
Accounts of subscribers maintained at EPFO are held under fiduciary relationship and information relating to such accounts is personal in nature and exempt from disclosure to third party under Section 8(1)(e) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship, unless the competent authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship, unless the competent authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; & (j) of the RTI Act unless the seeker of information is able to show larger public interest to justify the disclosure. In the matter at hand the appellant has not established that the information sought is for larger public purpose. Hence, there is no need to interfere with the respondent’s decision. The matter is closed.
BASANT SETH
Information Commissioner
Citation: Mr. K. Jeyasankar v. EPFO in File No. CIC/BS/A/2013/002558/6222