Is the FAA supposed to give hearing to the RTI applicant?
11 Jun, 2013Background
The appellant filed an application under the Right to Information (RTI) Act with the Employees' Provident Fund Organization (EPFO) seeking certified copies of documents relating to the payment made by EPF authorities to the subscriber’s account with the SBI. He also sought the inward/ outward number, copies of documents prepared for the payment of the amount to the employee, date of opening of PF account, name of account holder and details of EPFO staff who processed the payment. The Public Information Officer (PIO) did not provide the desired information.
Proceedings
During the hearing the before Central Information Commission (CIC), the PIO stated that the information sought related to a lady who had declined to give her consent for disclosure. She had stated that there is marital dispute between her and the applicant and no details should be furnished to him as the information is personal in nature and is disrupting her personal life. The appellant pointed out that he is not seeking any financial details. The PIO stated that the appellant in the past has asked for several details about the PF account of the same lady but the Commission in their decision (in file No. CIC/BS/A/2012/000025) held that the information was 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; 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; of the RTI Act. The appellant argued that the respondent is trying to mix two RTI applications and the Commission should decide the issue at hand on its merits. He further stated that the First Appellate Authority (FAA) neither decided the appeal nor gave him any opportunity of hearing. The PIO submitted that he can provide the inward/ outward number, date of opening of PF account, name of account holder and the name of the EPFO staff who processed the payment. He also submitted that the documents prepared for payment of the EPF amount contains sensitive personal details relating to the subscriber which cannot be provided being 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; 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; of the RTI Act.
View of CIC
The Commission observed that the information which the PIO is willing to furnish should be provided to the appellant. Regarding the copies of documents prepared for the payment of EPF amount to the subscriber, the CIC held that the same was 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; 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; of the RTI Act as no larger public interest has been cited by the appellant to justify its disclosure. The Commission further ruled that deciding an appeal after rendering an opportunity of hearing to the parties is a fundamental principle of jurisprudence. It is conducive to fairness and transparency and accords with the principals of natural justice. As per Section 19(6) An appeal under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) shall be disposed of within thirty days of the receipt of the appeal or within such extended period not exceeding a total of forty-five days from the date of filing thereof, as the case may be, for reasons to be recorded in writing. of the RTI Act the FAA is required to dispose of an appeal within 30 days of the receipt thereof and as far as possible also give the appellant as well as third party an opportunity of hearing specially if he so requests, without forgetting that the essence of RTI Act is to provide complete, correct and timely information to the appellant. The CIC held that FAA should take a careful note of the above for future.
Citation: Mr. P. K. Agashe v. EPFO in File No. CIC/BS/A/2012/000843/2592
RTI Citation : RTIFI/2013/CIC/1354
Click here to view original RTI order of Court / Information Commission