Disclosure of the details of top 100 defaulters of the Bank
The appellant filed an application under the Right to Information (RTI) Act with the Canara Bank seeking information about top huge loan defaulters, copy of the audit report conducted by Reserve Bank of India (RBI) during a certain period and action taken report submitted by the bank to RBI. The Public Information Officer (PIO) denied the information to the appellant under section 8(1)(d), 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; and 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.
During the hearing before the Central Information Commission (CIC), the respondent referred to an earlier decision of the Commission (in Appeal No. CIC/PB/A/2007/01082) wherein it was held that a onetime settlement arrived at by the bank in respect of a Nonperforming Account was a matter of commercial confidence and the bank was under no obligation to disclose such information. The respondent also referred to Commission's another decision (No.451/IC (A)/2006 F.No. CIC/MA/A/2006/00511), in which it was held that for effective management and recovery of loans for which the Bank is responsible, if any lapses are detected in the audit reports, it is not necessary for a citizen to scrutinize such action.
View of CIC
The Commission rejected the appeal observing that the approach of the bank was in conformity with the RTI Act.
Citation: Mr. N. Ramesh v. Canara Bank in Decision No. CIC/SM/A/2012/000581/VS/03169
RTI Citation : RTIFI/2013/CIC/1334
Click here to view original RTI order of Court / Information Commission