Information regarding the policy purchased by the appellant’s deceased wife - PIO: claim form B and B1 to be submitted for providing information - CIC: details of commission paid to the Agent may not be disclosed as it is third party information

Facts:

1. The appellant, Shri Rajendra Chaubey, has submitted RTI application dated 2 December 2012 before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Life Insurance Corporation of India, Hazaribagh; seeking information regarding the policy Nos. 547139147, 547145488, 547154874, 547139117 & 5449695229 which were purchased by the appellant’s deceased wife Smt. Radhika Devi through a total of 4 points.

2. The appellant preferred appeal dated 17 January 2013 to the first appellate authority (FAA), when he didn’t receive any reply from the CPIO concerned. Vide order dated 18 January 2013, CPIO furnished information sought in point Nos. 1,3 & 4 to the appellant and denied the information sought in point No. 2 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. of the RTI Act, 2005. Vide order dated 12 February 2013 & 26 February 2013, FAA directed the CPIO to examine the file and provide the documents immediately.

3. Being aggrieved and not satisfied by the above response of the public authority, the appellant preferred second appeal before the Commission.

4. The matter was heard today via videoconferencing. The appellant, Shri Rajendra Chaubey, was not present at the hearing and respondents, Shri P.K. Ghosh, Manager (Legal) representing FAA and Shri K. L. Hembram, CPIO (Hazaribagh Divisonal Office) made submissions from Bokaro.

5. The notice of the CIC’s hearing could not be served to the appellant and was returned to the CIC as he was not available at his residence. The CPIO submitted that the appellant was contacted over telephone and he assured that he would be attending their Bokaro Office. The appellant, however, did not attend. It was further submitted that Information sought w.r.t five insurance policies can only be disclosed after complete details of the policies are submitted. The CPIO received the copy of death certificates and policy bonds, however, claim form B and B1 had not been submitted by the appellant as of date. He added that the matter will be processed on receipt of the relevant forms. This was informed to the appellant telephonically and vide letter dated 21/2/2013. The appellant may still submit the claim form B and B1 and accordingly information will be provided to him. They sent a written communication to this effect to him on 26.2.2014.

7. Details of the Commission paid to the Agent may not be disclosed to the appellant as same stands as third party information.

Decision Notice

8. In view of the above, the CPIO/FAA’s order is upheld and the appeal is dismissed.

(Manjula Prasher)

Information Commissioner

Citation: Shri Rajendra Chaubey v. Life Insurance Corporation of India in Appeal: No. CIC/DS/A/2013/000777/MP