Statements and copy of investigation report conducted in relation to an incident concerning a particular person – information regarding complaints are one’s personal information - exempt from disclosure under section 8(1)(j)
24 Jul, 2013Facts:
1. Appellant submitted RTI application dated 02 April 2012 before the CPIO, NIACL, Indore, seeking copies of statements and copy of investigation report which was conducted in relation to the incident concerning Sunil Verma in the office on 24.01.2012.
2. Vide CPIO Order dated 18 May 2012, CPIO denied the information seeking exemption under Section 8(1)(g) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information, the disclosure of which would endanger the life or physical safety of any person or identify the source of information or assistance given in confidence for law enforcement or security purposes; .
3. Not satisfied by the CPIO’s reply, the Appellant 6preferred First Appeal to the First Appellate Authority dated 16 July 2012.
4. Vide FAA Order dated 14 August 2012, the FAA held that the desired information is related to “Third Party & Personal” hence denied under section 8(1)(d) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information including commercial confidence, trade secrets or intellectual property, the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of a third party, unless the competent authority is satisfied that 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. 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. 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 RTI Act and also held that the information regarding the investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders cannot be provided under section 8(1)(h) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; , hence denied. Further, held that denial of information under section 8(1)(g) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information, the disclosure of which would endanger the life or physical safety of any person or identify the source of information or assistance given in confidence for law enforcement or security purposes; of RTI Act was not proper by the CPIO, Bhopal RO.
5. Being aggrieved and not satisfied by the above response of the Public Authority, the Appellant preferred Second Appeal before the Commission.
6. Matter was heard today. Respondents were present in person and also heard along with appellant via videoconferencing from Bhopal. Appellant stated that she did not seek third party information and that she was also part of the incident which was investigated by the three committee member who were sent from Bhopal to Indore to look into the matter. Respondent submitted that the requested information had been denied by the first appellate authority in terms of the provisions of section 8 (1)(d), 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. 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. 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. and section 8(1)(h) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; of the Act. It was submitted that the New India Assurance Company Limited is a commercial organisation in the business of insurance having a vast employee base. Maintaining discipline within the caders was paramount for the management in order to secure their competitive edge in the highly dynamic environment within which the insurance business is conducted. By disclosing the statements of all the employees made before the committee members during the investigation would further vitiate the atmosphere which was not desirable in the Company's commercial interest. Appellant on the other hand stated that she was the victim of misconduct of some of her colleagues and that the management had, by issuing her a Memo sought to colour the conduct of all the employees with the same brush which was unfair in her view.
Decision notice
8. After hearing the averments of both parties, Commission upholds the order of the first appellate authority and denies the disclosure of the requested information under the provisions of 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. 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. 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 Act. This decision is as per the ratio of Supreme Court orders in the matter of Girish Ramachandra Deshpande Vs Central information Commission & Ors. (SLP(C) NO.27734 of 2012 dated 3.10.2012).
Accordingly appeal is dismissed.
(Smt. Deepak Sandhu)
Information Commissioner (DS)
Citation: Kumari Sushma Sharma v. New India Assurance Co. in Appeal: No. CIC/DS/A/2012/2690