Photostat copy of the telephone application submitted by the late father of appellant for phone connection was denied u/s 8(1)(e) - CIC: information relating to any subscriber cannot be disclosed to third party being exempt u/s 8(1)(j)
7 Feb, 2014Information sought:
The applicant wants the Photostat copy of the Telephone application under RTI Act submitted by his father Late Gadivemula Subrahmanyam seeking for phone connection at D/NC which was provided on 15/3/2000 with indicator number 24685.
Grounds for the Second Appeal: The FAA has denied the information under 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; 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.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing: The following were present
Appellant: Ms. Gadivemula Vijayalakshmi through VC
Respondent: Mr. M Salaudin APIO through VC
The appellant stated that she wants a copy of the application submitted by her late father to the BSNL for obtaining a telephone connection. She informed that the document is needed as her brother has forged the signature of her late father and prepared a bogus will. The APIO stated that after passing away of the original subscriber the telephone was transferred in the name of his son (as he was the nominee) and the phone has been disconnected on 28/07/2012 due to nonpayment of the bills. He argued that the information relates to third party and no public purpose is involved and exempt under 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; 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. The APIO added that the BSNL cannot be dragged into a private dispute and the appellant should move the court for obtaining the information. The appellant pleaded that the respondent should keep the documents safe till she obtains a court order as her brother can tamper with the file. The APIO assured that the documents will be kept safe.
Decision notice:
BSNL is bound to protect the confidentiality of its subscribers and information relating to telephone connection of any subscriber cannot be disclosed to third party being exempt under 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 unless the seeker of the information is able to show larger public interest to justify the disclosure.
The matter is closed.
BASANT SETH
Information Commissioner
Citation : Ms. Gadivemula Vijayalakshmi v. BSNL in File No. CIC/BS/A/2013/000117/4429