Respondent: ECGC issues cover to the Bank on account of various exporters; Hence, information cannot be shared being exempted u/s 8(1)(d) and (e) as it is a contract between ECGC Ltd and the respective Bank, which is fiduciary - CIC: Denial upheld
21 May, 2025
Information sought:
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application (offline) dated 12.05.2023 seeking the following information:
“1) Certified copies of ECGC Policy obtained on behalf of our Company for the PCL Exposure of Rs 13.99 Crores.
2) Details of claims Filed by the Bank with ECGC under the Guarantee Cover provided.
3) Details of Claim Paid by ECGC to the Corporation Bank against claim filed by them.
4) If any amount of Claim has been returned by Corporation Bank to ECGC, details of the same.”
2. The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 13.06.2023 stating as under:
“ECIB cover issued to Bank is Whole turnover cover. The documents does not mention name of any specific exporter. Moreover, the Information with regard to ECIB covers issued to the insured Bank is a contract between ECGC and the Bank. The same is exempt under Section 8(e) and 11 of the RTI Act 2005.”
3. Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 20.07.2023. The FAA vide its order dated 07.08.2023, held as under.
“Query: Certified copies of ECGC Policy obtained on behalf of our Company.
Response: The ECIB covers (both Packing Credit and Post Shipment) are issued to the Bank on a whole turnover basis. The Company issues cover to the Bank(s) on account of various exporters and the information cannot be shared as it is a contract between ECGC Ltd and the respective Bank. The bank provides data/information as per terms and conditions of the insurance cover obtained by them. The same is exempted under Section 8 (d), (e) and Section 11 of The RTI Act 2005.
Please visit our website (www.ecoc.in) for more details on the covers issued to the banks. We also suggest you to approach your own bank and obtain information as the banks client.”
4. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Absent.
Respondent: Ms. Rachna Baberwal, FAA-cum-DGM, attended the hearing through VC.
5. The Appellant did not participate in the hearing.
6. The Respondent submitted that ECGC issues cover to the Bank(s) on account of various exporters and hence, the information sought by the Appellant in the instant RTI Application cannot be shared being exempted under Section 8 (1) (d) and (e) as it is a contract between ECGC Ltd and the respective Bank, which is held under fiduciary capacity. He added that their office has also suggested the Appellant to approach the concerned Bank for any information, vide letter dated 07.08.2023.
Decision:
7. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case and perusal of the records, observes that a suitable reply in terms of RTI Act has been given by the Respondent vide letter dated 13.06.2023 and 07.08.2023. Moreover, the Appellant has not participated in the hearing to contest the submissions made by the Respondent.
No intervention of the Commission is required in the instant case
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Vinod Kumar Tiwari
Information Commissioner
Citation: Aruna Prabhakaran v. ECGC Limited, CIC/ECGCL/A/2024/100264; Date of Decision : 30.04.2025