Information regarding audits conducted in the Punjab National Bank, its closure report etc., was denied claiming that it is personal information of customers and of commercial confidence of bank which is held in fiduciary capacity - CIC: denial upheld

Facts:

1. The appellant, Shri Dilip Kumar Richhariya, submitted RTI application dated 10 December 2012 before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Punjab National Bank, Mahrauni; seeking information regarding audits conducted in the respondent bank, its closure report etc., through a total of 5 points.

2. Vide reply dated 26 December 2012, CPIO furnished pointwise information to the appellant. Not satisfied with the CPIO’s reply on point no. 2, the appellant preferred an appeal dated 8 January 2013 to the first appellate authority (FAA) alleging that he had been furnished misleading and unsatisfactory information by the CPIO concerned. In response to the said appeal; vide reply dated 30 January 2013, CPIO denied the information on point no. 2 u/s 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; , (e) & (j) of the RTI Act, 2005. No order has been passed by the FAA in this case.

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 respondents stated that they had intimated the kinds of audit that is carried out in case of their bank but the appellant had also sought information about the PNB Maharauni Branch’s Audit reports for the years 2007 onwards. The appellant had been informed that the copy of the said reports may not be provided as it contains information of the bank’s customers which is of commercial confidence of the bank and disclosure of which would attract 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; of the RTI Act. Further, the information sought about bank’s customers is held in fiduciary capacity with the bank and disclosure of which would attract 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; of the RTI Act, 2005. It was also added that the audit report contain information of their customers which is third party information, the disclosure of which would attract 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. In rest of the points complete information as held has been provided to the appellant.

Decision Notice

5. The Commission accepts the CPIO’s submission and dismisses the present appeal.

(Manjula Prasher)

Information Commissioner

Citation: Shri Dilip Kumar Richhariya v. Punjab National Bank in Appeal: No. CIC/VS/A/2013/001376/MP