Respondent: Copies of certificates of the third party could not be provided u/s 8(1)(j) - CIC: The proviso to sec 8(1) (j) does not undo the section nor does not itself create any new right; The RTI Act does not provide for resolution of grievances
27 Sep, 2016ORDER
1. Shri Sunder Singh, the appellant, sought information regarding the educational and professional qualifications of the branch manager of Mohabbatpur branch, Tehsil Mandi Adampur, Distt Hisar along with the attested copies of the certificates vide his RTI application dated 10.3.2015.
2. The CPIO, vide his response dated 7.4.2015, denied information being sought u/s 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; and (j) as this was personal information of the third party and the bank had to maintain confidentiality in this regard. He further added that no larger public interest was involved in the matter. Aggrieved with the decision of the CPIO, the appellant approached the first appellate authority who gave the qualifications of the branch manager to the appellant while denying the copies of educational and professional qualifications certificates. The appellant was not satisfied and appealed to the Commission saying that the CPIO had not taken into account the proviso to 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. 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. while deciding his case.
3. The matter was heard by the Commission. The respondents sated that they had already given him information on the educational qualifications of the officer concerned and reiterated the position that the copies of certificates of the third party could not be provided to the appellant being third party information that was held by them in fiduciary capacity. The appellant who came late in the afternoon and was heard taking a sympathetic view even though he was late as he came from Hisar to Delhi rather than be present at Hisar itself. The appellant accepted the denial of information regarding the denial of the copy of certificates to him but stated that he was concerned regarding non sanction of loan for installing splinter system in his land for which he had applied almost two years back and that is why he travelled all the distance from Hisar to Delhi.
4. The Commission observes that the respondents had rightly denied the copies of certificates of educational qualifications of the branch manager concerned. The appellant had raised the issue that ‘information which cannot be denied to the Parliament cannot be denied to him’ with reference to the proviso of 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. 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. This issue had been elaborately clarified by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in its decision dated 30.11.2009 in the matter of Union of India Thr. Director Vs. Central Information Commission & Ors [Writ Petition (Civil) No. 8396 of 2009 held: “43. A proviso can be enacted by the legislature to serve several purposes. In Sundaram Pillai Vs. Patte Birman (1985) 1 SSC 591 the scope and purpose of a proviso and an explanation has been examined in detail. Normally, a proviso is meant to be an exception to something in the main enactment or to qualify something enacted therein which but for the proviso would be within the purview of the enactment. A proviso cannot be torn apart from the main enactment nor can it be used to qualify and set at naught, the object of the main enactment Sarthi on “Interpretation of Statutes”, referred to in the said judgment, states that a proviso is subordinate to the main section and one of the principles which can be applied in a given case is that a proviso would not enlarge an enactment except for compelling reasons. It is unusual to import legislation from a proviso into the body of the statute. But in exceptional cases a proviso in itself may amount to a substantive provision. The proviso in the present case is a guiding factor and not a substantive provision which overrides Section 8(1) (j) of the RTI Act. It does not undo or rewrite 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. 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 and does not itself create any new right. The purpose is only to clarify that while deciding the question of larger public interest i.e. the question of balance between ‘public interest in form of right to privacy’ and ‘public interest in access to information’ is to be balanced.
5. The Commission also observes that the appellant has a grievance regarding non sanction of his loan. The RTI Act does not provide for resolution of grievances. Looking to the long pending request of the appellant, the respondent authority may look into his request for sanction of loan as per prevalent rules and take action as deemed fit.
6. The Commission does not find any reason to intervene in the matter. The appeal is disposed of.
(Manjula Prasher)
Information Commissioner
Citation: Shri Sunder Singh v. State Bank of Patiala in Appeal No . CIC/MP/A/2015/001705