Is the information about accounts and transactions of a bank liable to be disclosed under RTI?
The appellant filed an application under the Right to Information (RTI) Act with the State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur (SBBJ) seeking information on various accounts and transactions of the bank. He also wanted to know the particulars of the banking personnel. The Public Information Officer (PIO) denied the information 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 stating that it relates to trade secret, fiduciary relationship and personal information.
During the hearing before the Central Information Commission (CIC), the appellant stated that he needed the information to demonstrate the manner in which the bank establishment was following dual policy in administration and discriminating mindlessly between its own staffs. He alleged that he was dismissed for certain reasons whereas there were instances where the problem or the situation was far more serious but the bank did not took similar action. The appellant further stated that the bank tried to protect some and punished others in similar situations and the stand taken by the respondent that the matter is confidential or secret was untenable as he himself was bank officer and was aware of such working. The appellant also stated that the stand taken by the respondent that the matter is confidential or secret is untenable as it is well known that this kind of information is published in due process.
View of CIC
The Commission directed the PIO to enable the appellant to inspect the relevant files and documents.
Citation: Shri S.P. Sharma v State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur in Decision No.CIC/DS/A/2012/000399/VS/02280
RTI Citation : RTIFI/2013/CIC/1126
Click here to view original RTI order of Court / Information Commission