Complaint of fake note issue raised by HDFC Bank Employees Union - disclosure of inspection reports of RBI & related issues are pending in the High Courts of Delhi & Bombay - CIC: PIO to take action in the light of the HC orders as an when decided

Inspection report relating to the complaint of fake note issue raised by HDFC Bank Employees Union against Kollam Branch of HDFC Bank was denied u/s 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. & 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; claiming it involves personal information of account holders; contains systems analysis of the bank concerned along with the observations of the RBI officers which will be tentative in nature, the disclosure of which may not be fully understood in their proper perspective and may, therefore, cause panic among the public; Moreover, the matter regarding the disclosure of inspection reports of RBI and related issues are pending in the Hon’ble High Courts of Delhi and Bombay - CIC: PIO to take action in the light of the HC orders as an when the case is decided

Facts:

1. The appellant, Shri S. S. Pillai, submitted RTI application dated 7 January 2013 before the Regional Director, Reserve Bank of India, Thiruvananthapuram; seeking information regarding inspection report dated 17.8.2012 pertaining to fake note issue complaint raised by HDFC Bank Employees’ Union (dated 26.7.2012) aginst HDFC Bank, Kollam Branch.

2. Vide replies dated 29 January 2013, CPIO denied the requested information u/s 8(1)(a) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information, disclosure of which would prejudicially affect the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security, strategic, scientific or economic interests of the State, relation with foreign State or lead to incitement of an offence; of the RTI Act, 2005. Not satisfied with the CPIO’s reply, the appellant preferred an appeal dated 11 April 2013 to the first appellate authority (FAA) alleging that he had been wrongly denied the information by the CPIO concerned. Vide order dated 28 May 2013, FAA denied the information u/s 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 RTI Act, 2005 and upheld the CPIO’s decision.

3. Not satisfied with the response of the public authority, the appellant preferred second appeal before the Commission.

4. The matter was heard today. The appellant had sought inspection report dated 17.8.2012 relating to the complaint of fake note issue raised by HDFC Bank Employees Union (dated 26.7.2012) against Kollam Branch of HDFC Bank.

5. The respondents stated that the information sought by the appellant is exempt u/s 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 (h) as it involves personal information of account holders besides the inspection report also contains systems analysis of the bank concerned along with the observations of the RBI officers which will be tentative in nature, the disclosure of which may not be fully understood in their proper perspective and may, therefore, cause panic among the public. Moreover, the matter regarding the disclosure of inspection reports of RBI and related issues are pending in the Hon’ble High Courts of Delhi and Bombay.

Decision Notice

6. The Commission directs the CPIO to take action to respond to the applicant’s request in the light of the Hon’ble courts’ orders as and when the matter is decided. The appeal is disposed of.

(Manjula Prasher)

Information Commissioner

Citation: Shri S. S. Pillai v. Reserve Bank of India in Appeal: No. CIC/VS/A/2013/001595/MP