List of cases filed by the Company & filed against the company during the last five years was denied stating that it is voluminous and difficult to collate - CIC: information could not be given u/s 7(9) as it would disproportionately divert the resources
1. The appellant, Shri Deepak Pandey, submitted RTI application dated July 30, 2013 before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), National Insurance Co. Ltd., Indore seeking information regarding panel of advocates at Indore office, list of cases filed by Company and filed against the company during the last five years, job distribution to panel advocates etc. through a total of 7 points.
2. Vide letter dated August 26, 2013, the CPIO denied information u/s 8(1) (d) & (e) of the RTI Act, 2005 but provided list of advocates. Dissatisfied with the reply given by the CPIO, the appellant preferred an appeal dated September 16, 2013 to the first appellate authority (FAA) alleging that he had been wrongly denied the information. Vide reply dated October 11, 2013 the FAA upheld the decision of the CPIO.
3. Dissatisfied with the public authority, the appellant preferred the present appeal before the Commission seeking information.
4. The matter was heard by the Commission. The appellant was not present during hearing in spite of a notice of hearing having been issued to him. The respondents stated that stated that information had been rightly denied. With reference to point 2, they informed that information sought was voluminous and number of court cases originating from the Company and against the Company was difficult to collate. They stated that information could not be given. The appellant was not present to point out any shortcoming(s).
5. It is noted that information sought under point 2, 5 & 6 of the RTI application is voluminous and not readily available with the respondents and has to be collected from different offices. Therefore, information could not be given u/s 7(9) An information shall ordinarily be provided in the form in which it is sought unless it would disproportionately divert the resources of the public authority or would be detrimental to the safety or preservation of the record in question. of the RTI Act, 2005 as the same would disproportionately divert the resources of the public authority.
6. The Commission directs to provide information on point 1 regarding name of empanelled advocates and point 7 i.e total amount paid to the advocates during the last five years within fifteen days of the receipt of the order of the Commission. The appeal is disposed of.
Citation: Shri Deepak Pandey v. National Insurance Co. Ltd., in Appeal No. CIC/MP/A/2014/000647