Should the details of the Policy holders of LIC be disclosed?
The appellant sought information regarding his own policy taken under the New Jeevan Suraksha Plan; and name & coordinates of all policy holders taken under New Jeevan Dhara policy along with details of GMA (Guaranty maturity addition) amount which was paid to each of the policyholder on the date of vesting of the policy. The details about his own policy were provided by the PIO while the remaining information was denied under Section 8(1)(d), 8 (1)(f) and 8 (1)(j) of the RTI Act. On first appeal, the FAA upheld the decision of PIO.
View of CIC
The appellant claimed that information was sought so as to alert all policy holders regarding their entitlement for receiving GMA amount. He stated that based on his own experience, this was important and in public interest as he himself had received GMA amount in respect of three policies taken by him through intervention of Ombudsman and that too after delay of six years. The Commission accepted the argument of the appellant that the interest of the large number of policy holders having policies under Jeevan Dhara scheme would be protected if they are alerted regarding their additional entitlement and consequently would not have to suffer the harassment undergone by the appellant in claiming their legitimate dues from the Corporation. However, the Commission observed that this larger public interest must be balanced with the provisions of the nondisclosure clauses under section 8 which have been quoted by the respondent. Therefore, the Commission directed the PIO to place on their website the total number of policy holders having policies under Jeevan Dhara; the total number of policy holders who had been released GMA amounts due to them and total number of cases still pending with the Corporation.
Citation: Shri Kailash Agarwal v. LIC of India in Appeal: No. CIC/DS/A/2011/000519