Central Information Commission
Tidke Sadashiv Kachru vs Life Insurance Corporation Of India on 25 October, 2024
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
File No: CIC/LICOI/A/2023/132807
Tidke Sadashiv Kachru .....अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
PIO,
LIC of India, Nanded
Divisional Office, CRM Dept.,
Jeevan Prakash Building,
Gandhi Nagar, Nanded - 431605 .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 18.10.2024
Date of Decision : 24.10.2024
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 10.04.2023
CPIO replied on : 28.04.2023
First appeal filed on : 23.05.2023
First Appellate Authority's order : 21.06.2023
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 27.06.2023
Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 10.04.2023 seeking the following information:Page 1 of 5
"LIC Agent Code 0310595H Name: Seema Ramrao Pawde, her First Appointment in LIC Agent per month remuneration in Rs. your 2021-22 and 2022-23 remuneration or per yearly income got it today Year 2021-22, 2022-23 per yearly income or remuneration in Rs. your 2021-22 and 2022-23 remuneration or per yearly income got it today"
The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 28.04.2023 stating as under:
"You have sought the Agency recruitment date, Number of policies done, commission payment made.. etc details pertaining to the agent Seema Ramarao Pawade Code No 0310595H.
Section 11 of RTI Act 2005 was invoked for getting consent from the agent, for sharing of the information with you. The agent didn't agree for sharing of the information. In view of the same, information sought cannot be provided to you as it is exempt from disclosure, as per Section 8(1)(e) of RTI Act 2005 (Information held in fiduciary capacity by the respondent organization) and as per Section 8(1)(j) of RTI Act 2005 (Personal information of third party)."
Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 23.05.2023. The FAA vide its order dated 21.06.2023, held as under:
"On receipt of Appeal dated 23.05.2023, the matter was referred to the Third party Ms Seema Ramrao Pawde, Ag code 0310595H seeking her consent for furnishing the information under section 11 of RTI act. The Third party, Ms Seema Ramrao Pawde has again denied consent to provide the information that is available with us.
As the appellant has sought information about a third party, Agency and Commission earnings details under Agency Code 310595H- Seema Ramrao Pawde, Section 11 of RTI is invoked for getting consent from the Third party Ms Seema Ramrao Pawde, Ag code 0310595H for sharing of information with the appellant. The Third party Ms Seema Ramrao Pawde, Ag code 0310595H did not agree for sharing of the information. In view of the same, the decision taken by the CPIO is upheld as the information sought is exempt from disclosure under section 8(1)(e) (fiduciary information) and Section 8(1)(j) (Personal information of 3rd Party) Page 2 of 5 The point-wise reply is given for all the points raised in the appeal. The appeal of Mr. Sadashiv Kachru Tidke is, as a consequence, disposed of."
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: Shri N. Srinivasan, CPIO-cum-Manager (CRM), attended the hearing through VC.
The Appellant did not participate in the hearing.
The Respondent submitted that upon receipt of the RTI Application, their office has invoked the provisions of Section 11 of the RTI Application seeking consent of the concerned third party to share the information with the Appellant but the concerned third party has not given her consent to share her personal information. Therefore, the information has been denied to the under Section 8 (1) (e) and (j) of the RTI Act.
A written submission has been received from Shri N. Srinivasan, CPIO-cum- Manager (CRM), a copy of which has been sent to the Appellant and the same has been taken on record. The relevant extract of the same is as under:
"Background of the case Mrs. Seema Ramrao Pawde is working as LIC Agent - Code Number 0310595H in the Hingoli Branch of the respondent organization. As per the information provided by the Branch Manager, Hingoli Branch Office, being deemed PIO, Mrs. Seema Ramrao Pawde is appointed as LIC Agent code 0310595H on 31.05.2022. As she is appointed on 31-05-2022, the question of her selling any LIC policies or earning any agency commission during the financial year 2021-2022 does not arise. Mr. Sadashiv Kachru Tidke, the Appellant, has submitted a copy of the petition filed by Smt. Seema Sandeep Tidke (the Plaintiff) in which the Second respondent is mentioned as Sadashivrao Kachruji Tidke (Father-in-Law). The Petition dt 11-08-2021 is filed before the 1st Class Judicial Magistrate (C.J.J.D) Court Basmath under Sections 12, 18, 20 and 22 under The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 and the case number given is PWDA-application No. 37 of 2021. Further, on receipt of CIC Hearing notice, a letter enclosing the CIC Hearing notice was sent by Regd. Post on 07.10.2024 to Smt. Seema Ramrao Pawde, LIC Agent code 03105995H, to attend the CIC hearing scheduled on 18.10.2024. An E-mail was also Page 3 of 5 sent on 08-10-2024 to the emall-id registered in our Agency records, enclosing the copy of the above said letter dtd. 07-10-2024 addressed to her along with CIC Hearing Notice dtd. 27.09.2024. Ms. Seema R Pawde, the Third party, has informed that she is suffering from Chikungunya and will not be able to attend CIC Hearing. She has also not consented for sharing of any information with the Appellant. The Appellant has sought information which qualifies as "personal" Information of Mrs. Seema Ramrao Pawde, Agency code 310595H working in Hingoli BO, Nanded Division.
The then CPIO & the FAA have invoked appropriate Sections and given reply as per the provisions of RTI Act, 2005 within prescribed time limit of 30 days, at the Application and Appeal stage.
Further, the information sought by the Appellant regarding the commission earned, number of policies procured and Form 16 of Mrs. Seema Ramrao Pawde, daughter-in- law of the Appellant, is exempt from disclosure as per Section 8(1)(j) of RTI Act, 2005 being personal information of third party and cannot be provided without her consent. Moreover, the above matter is subjudice and the next date of hearing is 11.10.2024.
To substantiate the decision of this Office of Public Authority, the relevant excerpts of 3 CIC decisions in the matter is reproduced herewith:
The decision dated 28.06.2021, of Hon'ble CIC In case no. CIC/LICOI/A/2019/655274 - Mrs. Manjri Jain Vs. LIC of India third party Information sought by Legal heir is reproduced as under: "The Commission, after hearing the submissions of both the parties and after perusal of records, observes that the respondent has categorically informed the appellant on her RTI application that the information sought by her is personal information of third party and is held by them in fiduciary capacity, therefore, the same is exempted from disclosure under Section 8(1)(e) and 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. The Commission is of the view that the information sought by the appellant is third party information and is exempted from disclosure under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. The Commission is satisfied with the action/steps taken by the respondent in dealing with the RTI application of the appellant. Hence, no further intervention of the Commission is required in the matter." The decision dated 03.11.2022, of Hon'ble CIC, in case no. CIC/LICOI/A/2021/118497 Ms. Chitra Bhargava Vs. LIC of India-third party Information sought by legal heir-is reproduced as under: "The Commission, after hearing the submissions of both the parties and after perusal of records, is of the view that sharing of account holders' information with the appellant is ultra-vires the provisions of RTI Act as the desired information is 'personal information" exempted under Section 8(1) (e) and Section 8(1) (j) of the RTI Act."
The decision dated 08.10.2024, of Hon'ble CIC in case no. CIC/LICOI/A/2023/130840 - Mrs. Monika Vikas Malhare Vs. LIC of India third party information sought by legal heir is reproduced as under: "The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case and perusal of the records, observes that the information sought in the instant RTI Application is personal information of third party and the same is exempted from disclosure under Section 8 (1) (j) of the RTI Act. Hence, no relief can be given to the Appellant under the RTI Act."Page 4 of 5
In view of above clarifications to all the points raised by the Appellant, the Hon'ble CIC Is requested that the second appeal preferred by Shri Tidke Sadashiv Kachru be dismissed summarily. The copy of submission is also forwarded to the Appellant by speed post at his residential address mentioned in the Appeal le Shri Tidke Sadashiv Kachru, Prayag Nivas, Income Tax colony, Janardhan Nagar, Nanded 431605 on 11.10.2024."
Decision:
The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case and perusal of the records, observes that that the CPIO has furnished a suitable reply, applying the relevant provision of RTI Act to deny third party information. The Appellant did not attend the hearing to contest the submissions of the Respondent. Since there is no infirmity in the reply sent by the Respondent, no cause of action subsists in this case under the RTI Act for further adjudication.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Vinod Kumar Tiwari (िवनोद कुमार ितवारी) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स!ािपत ित) (S. Anantharaman) Dy. Registrar 011- 26181927 Date Page 5 of 5 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)