Information regarding the land possession certificates & rent receipt of the KCC loan beneficiaries was sought under apprehension that almost 90% of loan had been given with connivance on the basis of false documents - CIC: denial u/s 8(1)(d) & (e) upheld

ORDER

1. The appellant, Shri Ram Bilash Patel, submitted RTI application dated 5 July 2013 before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), State Bank of India, Mainatard (West Champaran); seeking information regarding the land possession certificates (LPC) and rent receipts submitted by the KCC beneficiaries at the time of taking the loan from Mainatard Branch from the year 2008 to 30.6.2013 etc.

2. Vide reply dated 9 July 2013, CPIO denied the information 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; 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; 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) of the RTI Act, 2005. Not satisfied by the CPIO’s reply, the appellant preferred an appeal dated 10 August 2013 to the first appellate authority (FAA) alleging that he had been wrongly denied the information by the CPIO concerned. Vide order dated 26 August 2013, FAA upheld the CPIO’s decision.

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

4. In the second case i.e. CIC/VS/A/2013/002289/MP the same information was sought about Bettiah branch of State Bank of India.

5. Both the matters were heard jointly as the subject matter was identical. The appellant’s representative submitted that the appellant had sought information regarding the land possession certificates and rent receipt of the KCC loan beneficiaries of the Mainatard and Bettiah Branch respectively. He submitted that he had sought this information due to his apprehension that that almost 90% of KCC loan had been given on the basis of false documents with the connivance of the corrupt bank officials. He alleged that the CPIO had denied the information due to ulterior motives and to protect their colleagues. The appellant also insisted that in a previous decision this Commission had given such information to the appellant but when the Commission asked him to produce any such decision he was not able to produce any.

6. The respondents submitted that they had denied the information 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; 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; 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) of the RTI Act as the information sought were sensitive information of their customers. Land possession certificates and rent receipt of the land against which the KCC loan had been granted come within the personal information which was available with them in fiduciary capacity and it also involved commercial confidence. Besides, the appellant could not substantiate the allegations made by him.

7. In view of the above, the Commission accepts the submission made by the respondents that the information sought for by the appellant is exempt from disclosure 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; 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; 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) of the RTI Act, 2005. Both the appeals are disposed of with this order.

(Manjula Prasher)

Information Commissioner

Citation: Shri Ram Bilash Patel v. State Bank of India in Appeal: No. CIC/VS/A/2013/002288/MP CIC/VS/A/2013/002289/MP